Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

hollywoodreporter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 199 posts

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#11

Post by wmf »

smabie wrote: post #2

I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but it seems to me that many companies pursue legal action that is against their own interest. Surely, Humvees in CoD could only help the brand, no? Moreover, the fact that they don't even sell any consumer products in the first place makes the entire suit even more dubious. The use of Humvees in CoD is going to sow confusion among the military purchasing officers and the…

Video games were paying licensing fees to arms makers for a while so they just wanted in on that.

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#12

Post by djsumdog »

tinkertamper wrote: post #4
smabie wrote: post #2

I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but it seems to me that many companies pursue legal action that is against their own interest. Surely, Humvees in CoD could only help the brand, no? Moreover, the fact that they don't even sell any consumer products in the first place makes the entire suit even more dubious. The use of Humvees in CoD is going to sow confusion among the military purchasing officers and the…

I also don't know what I'm talking about, but I think one of the core responsibilities of a trademark owner is that you establish a history of defending it. I heard once that if you don't do that you risk losing control of your rights to that property. Any smarty pants on here able to confirm/set me straight?

Yep, so this serve the companies interest because they're trying to defend their trademark; even if they failed. I doubt Humvee is in danger of becoming a generic term (Jeep is more likely; I cannot tell you much my it annoyed me my ex called her Suzuki 4x4 a "Jeep" .. it's not a Jeep! It's a 4x4 or off-roader.." but if they enter into other trademark battles, the opposing council can't say "Well they haven't tried to defend their trademark before now..."

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#13

Post by filoleg »

djsumdog wrote: post #12
tinkertamper wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don't know what I'm talking about, but I think one of the core responsibilities of a trademark owner is that you establish a history of defending it. I heard once that if you don't do that you risk losing control of your rights to that property. Any smarty pants on here able to confirm/set me straight?

Yep, so this serve the companies interest because they're trying to defend their trademark; even if they failed. I doubt Humvee is in danger of becoming a generic term (Jeep is more likely; I cannot tell you much my it annoyed me my ex called her Suzuki 4x4 a "Jeep" .. it's not a Jeep! It's a 4x4 or off-roader.." but if they enter into other trademark battles, the opposing council can't say "Well they haven't tried t…

Interesting you bring up a point about Jeep. Never once in the US I've heard of a non-Jeep-made SUV referred to as a "Jeep". But back when I lived in Russia, every single SUV was referred to as a "Jeep". I don't even know of another word for SUV in Russian. Not trying to argue against you btw, I just personally find stuff like this interesting.

EDIT: just checked the wikipedia page for SUV in russian, and yep, in the second paragraph it says that SUVs are usually referred to as "Jeeps" in post-Soviet countries.

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#14

Post by Swizec »

solinent wrote: post #9
crooked-v wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is called trademark erosion. An example of this historically would be aspirin, which was originally a trademarked brand name of Bayer but was legally ruled in 1918 and 1921 to have become genericized, because the company took no actions to prevent others from using the name. This generally only applies when non-holders use the trademark to market in the same field as the original business, though: not "we went t…

The standard example I've heard is for Trampoline. No one calls them rebound tumblers anymore. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trampoline#First_modern_trampo... I think this is really just a case of lawyers being super-protective. It also pays well, I'm sure. I think a words like Humvee or even Google have coloquially already lost their meaning--their meaning is polymorphic, it's only a matter of time (100 years is a m…

Trader Joe’s makes the best kleenex. And my iPhone captures the best kodak moments.

I also enjoy facetiming via Slack.

And of course googling for music is best done on Spotify.

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#15

Post by CM30 »

Have to be honest, I've always thought complaints about trademarked products in works of fiction were a silly thing to begin with. Why shouldn't a fictional universe feature products and businesses found in the real world? Are we supposedly to randomly assume all other universes don't have humvees or macbooks or the Red Cross? Who's to say the same people/companies/organisations would even be responsible in that work of fiction?

The law should basically just say there's no trademark violation in featuring a real world product/service in a fictional work so long as it couldn't reasonably be confused as a piece of marketing by the creator of said product or person. Obviously the work shouldn't be about say, Mickey Mouse, but it should be perfectly fine to feature say, Disney and their products as background elements in a fictional work without the approval of Disney.

Just seems ridiculous to have it work any other way.

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#16

Post by saagarjha »

CM30 wrote: post #15

Have to be honest, I've always thought complaints about trademarked products in works of fiction were a silly thing to begin with. Why shouldn't a fictional universe feature products and businesses found in the real world? Are we supposedly to randomly assume all other universes don't have humvees or macbooks or the Red Cross? Who's to say the same people/companies/organisations would even be responsible in that work…

What if I took your product and had it fail spectacularly in my movie?

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#17

Post by anticensor »

Smoosh wrote: post #3
smabie wrote: post #2

I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but it seems to me that many companies pursue legal action that is against their own interest. Surely, Humvees in CoD could only help the brand, no? Moreover, the fact that they don't even sell any consumer products in the first place makes the entire suit even more dubious. The use of Humvees in CoD is going to sow confusion among the military purchasing officers and the…

I suspect there's also an aspect of thinking by the company's management that control equals power and leads to profit. Clearly not fully thought through though.

Control over non-members is an implicit goal common to all kinds of organisations, even in ones that are primarily instituted to control its members.

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#18

Post by norifukuoka »

CM30 wrote: post #15

Have to be honest, I've always thought complaints about trademarked products in works of fiction were a silly thing to begin with. Why shouldn't a fictional universe feature products and businesses found in the real world? Are we supposedly to randomly assume all other universes don't have humvees or macbooks or the Red Cross? Who's to say the same people/companies/organisations would even be responsible in that work…

Meanwhile, in this other fictional universe, a guy who looks just like you and posts the same things as you on HN is a child pornographer. Not to worry, our hero stops him.

Or perhaps it is your company that is involved in the pornography. And they are secret Nazis. Not to worry. All fictional.

Re: 'Call of Duty' wins First Amendment victory over use of Humvees

#19

Post by caymanjim »

djsumdog wrote: post #12
tinkertamper wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don't know what I'm talking about, but I think one of the core responsibilities of a trademark owner is that you establish a history of defending it. I heard once that if you don't do that you risk losing control of your rights to that property. Any smarty pants on here able to confirm/set me straight?

Yep, so this serve the companies interest because they're trying to defend their trademark; even if they failed. I doubt Humvee is in danger of becoming a generic term (Jeep is more likely; I cannot tell you much my it annoyed me my ex called her Suzuki 4x4 a "Jeep" .. it's not a Jeep! It's a 4x4 or off-roader.." but if they enter into other trademark battles, the opposing council can't say "Well they haven't tried t…

I was about to comment in your ex's defense that "Jeep" originated from General Purpose ("GP"), so it's only fair that it reverts to the generic, but it turns out that story is apocryphal.
Post reply on HN