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

Jonathan's Card 2.0

talkaboutdesign.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: Jonathan's Card 2.0

#21

Post by jrockway »

gojomo wrote: post #4

Er, as far as I can tell: • this isn't associated with Jonathan but uses his name • this isn't associated with Starbucks but uses their logo • it's already empty • there's no details to suggest that the previous transfer-balance vulnerability has been closed – only that it's now harder to optimize the attack by knowing when the active card has a fat balance • the usable card number will change regularly so as to conf…

this isn't associated with Jonathan but uses his name

My name is Jonathan and I give this guy permission to use it. If you don't want someone to name their knock-off after your product, maybe don't name it after a common first name :)

Re: Jonathan's Card 2.0

#23

Post by dregger »

jrockway wrote: post #21
gojomo wrote: post #4

Er, as far as I can tell: • this isn't associated with Jonathan but uses his name • this isn't associated with Starbucks but uses their logo • it's already empty • there's no details to suggest that the previous transfer-balance vulnerability has been closed – only that it's now harder to optimize the attack by knowing when the active card has a fat balance • the usable card number will change regularly so as to conf…

this isn't associated with Jonathan but uses his name My name is Jonathan and I give this guy permission to use it. If you don't want someone to name their knock-off after your product, maybe don't name it after a common first name :)

By your logic, I should be able to make my own Craig's List.

Re: Jonathan's Card 2.0

#24

Post by gregschlom »

dregger wrote: post #23
jrockway wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this isn't associated with Jonathan but uses his name My name is Jonathan and I give this guy permission to use it. If you don't want someone to name their knock-off after your product, maybe don't name it after a common first name :)

By your logic, I should be able to make my own Craig's List.

And I guess that's exactly why trademarks were invented.

Re: Jonathan's Card 2.0

#25

Post by jrockway »

dregger wrote: post #23
jrockway wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this isn't associated with Jonathan but uses his name My name is Jonathan and I give this guy permission to use it. If you don't want someone to name their knock-off after your product, maybe don't name it after a common first name :)

By your logic, I should be able to make my own Craig's List.

The popular site is called Craigslist, one word. If he had called it Craig's List, then yes, you would be able to make your own. It's your given name and a common English word. Not trademarkable.

See also: Windows.

Re: Jonathan's Card 2.0

#26

Post by sunsu »

aforty wrote: post #17
_rs wrote: post #14

Any idea how they're changing the number? Sounds like it'd have to be a manual process rather than something they could automate.

Jonathan 1.0 automated it, why couldn't they? To curb abuse they are probably just not polling/updating as often. Who knows.

It's my understanding that in 1.0, the card barcode/number never changed, so it couldn't have been automated. Someone correct me if I misunderstood.

Re: Jonathan's Card 2.0

#27

Post by gojomo »

jrockway wrote: post #21
gojomo wrote: post #4

Er, as far as I can tell: • this isn't associated with Jonathan but uses his name • this isn't associated with Starbucks but uses their logo • it's already empty • there's no details to suggest that the previous transfer-balance vulnerability has been closed – only that it's now harder to optimize the attack by knowing when the active card has a fat balance • the usable card number will change regularly so as to conf…

this isn't associated with Jonathan but uses his name My name is Jonathan and I give this guy permission to use it. If you don't want someone to name their knock-off after your product, maybe don't name it after a common first name :)

Alas, that's not how it works for trademark law, or common courtesy. The relevant standard is whether use is likely to confuse.

By calling this "Jonathan's Card 2.0", and their explicit references, they're clearly trying to portray this as an official successor from the same agent(s). If Jonathan Card "1.0" cared about this, he could object on both legal and ethical grounds.

Re: Jonathan's Card 2.0

#30

Post by gojomo »

jrockway wrote: post #25
dregger wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By your logic, I should be able to make my own Craig's List.

The popular site is called Craigslist, one word. If he had called it Craig's List, then yes, you would be able to make your own. It's your given name and a common English word. Not trademarkable. See also: Windows.

It is not true that you have to combine things as a novel compound word (as with 'craigslist' and many other tech firms) in order to obtain trademark protection. Common names and plain words/phrases can be protected too, within a well-identified field of use, by either formal registration or force-of-use-over-time.

"Craig's List", in the field of an online listings site and community, is just as protectable as the smushed-together version. And, by risk of confusion with 'craigslist', the two-word version is now just as excluded from others' use as if 'craigslist' itself were named "Craig's List".

Even if your name is 'McDonald', you won't be able to open a "McDonald's" hamburger chain. If you wanted to sell cash registers worldwide, you couldn't start an "International Business Machines". You couldn't even get away with "Jonathan's International Business Machines".

Post reply on HN