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

Retraction from Tumblr

istumblrdown.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#31

Post by pcwalton »

chimeracoder wrote: post #24
darrenkopp wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, but to me it seems more like "we are actively defending our trademark (ala the hiring of the legal company), but we do not believe that you are infringing on that trademark and what you are doing is fair use, so carry on"

DannyBee (who is a lawyer) pointed out in the thread last night that this doesn't need to be "defended" against. He explained that, since they use the term "Tumblr" to refer specifically to the real company Tumblr, and since it's clear that they're not trying to masquerade as Tumblr or cause any confusion, that this is a legitimate use of the term and does not need to be "defended against" in order to protect the tra…

The legal term here, incidentally, appears to be "nominative use". (I learned a lot from that thread!)

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#32

Post by alan_cx »

Why no appreciation of the apology? If all people are going to do is find fault with people apologizing, why bother? How should Tumblr reacted? What are they supposed to do?

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#33

Post by eCa »

sillysaurus2 wrote: post #3

This seems like a risky move for tumblr, no? Doesn't this mean they're not actively defending their trademark? In which case this could cause them legal problems in the future.

The way I understand it (IANAL) is that you need to protect your trademark against people who uses confusing namings on things that isn't you. In this case "tumblr" clearly and explicitly refers to tumblr.com.

If you had to make sure that no one uses your trademark to talk about you, wouldn't that lead to a very strange place?

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#34

Post by [deleted] »

chimeracoder wrote: post #24
darrenkopp wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, but to me it seems more like "we are actively defending our trademark (ala the hiring of the legal company), but we do not believe that you are infringing on that trademark and what you are doing is fair use, so carry on"

DannyBee (who is a lawyer) pointed out in the thread last night that this doesn't need to be "defended" against. He explained that, since they use the term "Tumblr" to refer specifically to the real company Tumblr, and since it's clear that they're not trying to masquerade as Tumblr or cause any confusion, that this is a legitimate use of the term and does not need to be "defended against" in order to protect the tra…

[deleted]

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#36

Post by geuis »

alan_cx wrote: post #32

Why no appreciation of the apology? If all people are going to do is find fault with people apologizing, why bother? How should Tumblr reacted? What are they supposed to do?

Well said. A company can either continue on as before, which makes us associate them as bullies, or can correct a mistake. The real test is what comes after.

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#37

Post by bcoates »

sillysaurus2 wrote: post #18
lvs wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This type of thinking is poisonous to the industry and to all industries.

It's not "thinking." It's a question. It's annoying that I can't ask a startup question in a startup community without being characterized as an evil capitalist.

You don't want to be "could this get us sued?" guy. Lots of people have run into the type that uses it as a go-to passive aggressive way of opposing things. It's superficially reasonable because literally anything can get you sued in the US, but it's also a completely counterproductive attitude to actually making correct decisions.

Even if you, personally are asking the question in a reasonable context where the answer is probably "yes", just saying it gets you bucketed into the "toxic people who must be contained or avoided" bucket in a lot of otherwise reasonable people's minds. Unless you are actually employed as a lawyer, it would probably be a good career move to strike discussions of legal risk from your vocabulary.

ps: Yes, I know you were asking more about what Tumblr needs to do to keep the right to stop others from using their trademark, but nobody read past "legal problems"

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#38

Post by loceng »

cabalamat wrote: post #6
joeblau wrote: post #2

So essentially, a legal team was spamming anything with the word tumblr in it?

> a legal team was spamming anything with the word tumblr in it There ought to be some comeback on people who do this, just like there ought to be for people who send out false DMCA takedown notices.

Lawyers basically say until a cease and desist is received (confirmed received), then they've spent money and are serious.

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#39

Post by sillysaurus2 »

bcoates wrote: post #37
sillysaurus2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "thinking." It's a question. It's annoying that I can't ask a startup question in a startup community without being characterized as an evil capitalist.

You don't want to be "could this get us sued?" guy. Lots of people have run into the type that uses it as a go-to passive aggressive way of opposing things. It's superficially reasonable because literally anything can get you sued in the US, but it's also a completely counterproductive attitude to actually making correct decisions. Even if you, personally are asking the question in a reasonable context where the answ…

Even if you, personally are asking the question in a reasonable context where the answer is probably "yes", just saying it gets you bucketed into the "toxic people who must be contained or avoided" bucket in a lot of otherwise reasonable people's minds. Unless you are actually employed as a lawyer, it would probably be a good career move to strike discussions of legal risk from your vocabulary.

This is America. We're here to make money, and to win. That means operating in a legal system that can work for us or against us depending on the law. If a startup is too immature to see my question as anything other than a straightforward request for information, then I wouldn't want to work for them anyway.

Re: Retraction from Tumblr

#40

Post by bowlofpetunias »

> ...pursuing trademark infringers...

That's the part they should be apologizing for.

Unless their business is actually getting hurt in any way (is someone selling fake Chinese made Tumblr t-shirts on the black market?), this is just a systematic exercise in corporate bullying.

They shouldn't be engaged in this in the first place. Tumblr is not friggin' Nike.

Post reply on HN