BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: Pheonike on April 01, 2015, 06:14:20 pm
-
They got the pretty visuals and marketing
https://changemoney.org/
https://bitreserve.org/en/blog/posts/bitreserve/our-bitmetal-collection-gets-bigger-introducing-adamantium-and-orichalcum
-
Still claiming bitgold and bitsilver are trademarked. Can anyone look into this?
-
Meh, I'm pretty sure they already lost their potential userbase as soon as they said bitcoin won't be around for long...
but lookie here, apparently they think they own the trademark for BitUSD now too:
https://bitreserve.org/en/about-us/trademark-notice
•Bitcurrency™◦Bitdollar™ / BitUSD™
◦Bityuan™ / BitCNY™
◦Bityen™ / BitJPY™
◦Biteuro™ / BitEUR™
◦Bitpound™ / BitGBP™
◦Bitmxpeso™ / BitMXN™
◦Bitrupee™ / BitINR™
◦Bitswissfranc™ / BitCHF™
◦Bitphpeso™ / BitPHP™
◦Bitpeso™
•Bitmetals™ ◦Bitgold™ / BitXAU™
◦Bitsilver™ / BitXAG™
◦Bitplatinum™ / BitXPT™
◦Bitpalladium™ / BitXPD™
•Bitelectrum™
•Bitoil™
What a bunch of fools.™
-
This man has a throuble.
The richthiest man of Mexico copy BitAssets model and names, claiming is his trademark. --- nice press titular
lets go to blog it almost, take a look
http://bitshares2.blogspot.com.es/2015/04/el-hombre-mas-rico-de-mexico-intenta.html
-
Wheres BitUnobtanium?
-
Meh, I'm pretty sure they already lost their potential userbase as soon as they said bitcoin won't be around for long...but lookie here, apparently they think they own the trademark for BitUSD now too:
https://bitreserve.org/en/about-us/trademark-notice
•Bitcurrency™◦Bitdollar™ / BitUSD™
◦Bityuan™ / BitCNY™
◦Bityen™ / BitJPY™
◦Biteuro™ / BitEUR™
◦Bitpound™ / BitGBP™
◦Bitmxpeso™ / BitMXN™
◦Bitrupee™ / BitINR™
◦Bitswissfranc™ / BitCHF™
◦Bitphpeso™ / BitPHP™
◦Bitpeso™
•Bitmetals™ ◦Bitgold™ / BitXAU™
◦Bitsilver™ / BitXAG™
◦Bitplatinum™ / BitXPT™
◦Bitpalladium™ / BitXPD™
•Bitelectrum™
•Bitoil™
What a bunch of fools.™
I think IP/Trademark/Copyright law is unnecessary and does more harm than good, but aside from debating why IP law shouldn't exist, it's better to address the reality that it does just as one has to address the reality of government.
Here are the main points for Trademark law:
https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm
#1 - How do you qualify?
"Assuming that a trademark qualifies for protection, rights to a trademark can be acquired in one of two ways: (1) by being the first to use the mark in commerce; or (2) by being the first to register the mark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO")"
Wasn't bitShares first anyways?
#2 - In regards to prerequisites:
"In order to serve as a trademark, a mark must be distinctive -- that is, it must be capable of identifying the source of a particular good. In determining whether a mark is distinctive, the courts group marks into four categories, based on the relationship between the mark and the underlying product: (1) arbitrary or fanciful, (2) suggestive, (3) descriptive, or (4) generic. "
I would suggest BitAssets falls under category 3) & 4) which is either unprotected or difficult to protect. 'Bit' denotes a basic computing unit or something 'computer-related'/'digital'. Assets/USD/Euro/dollar/gold are all generic terms. Hence I doubt the trademark will stand in court if you have a half-decent lawyer. BTW who are the going to sue?.. the DAC? :P
But even for outside companies that promote BTS or BitAssets, there should be no real issue. There's always the problem that large companies that like to bully smaller companies may try to drain resources via a legal battle. It's also just a tactic to create fear to discourage others from using the same terms.
However using the (TM) symbol is very unappealing and has a negative effect for consumers so I would recommend that they don't trademark it. It's bad for business and they have extremely weak legal grounds anyways.
-
Too bad. Those names are out in the wild, in use for up to two years by a couple dozen different organizations in the worldwide BitShares ecosystem. Good luck trying to claim prior use. :)
We've already been told that BitShares can't be registered for the same bogus reason that Bitcoin can't be registered - "Its too descriptive". So, good luck with BitUSD and BitGold and bitreserve.
-
Too bad. Those names are out in the wild, in use by a couple dozen different organizations in the worldwide BitShares ecosystem. Good luck trying to claim prior use. :)
We've already been told that BitShares can't be registered for the same bogus reason that Bitcoin can't be registered - "Its too descriptive". So, good luck with BitUSD and BitGold...
+5%
-
Too bad. Those names are out in the wild, in use for up to two years by a couple dozen different organizations in the worldwide BitShares ecosystem. Good luck trying to claim prior use. :)
We've already been told that BitShares can't be registered for the same bogus reason that Bitcoin can't be registered - "Its too descriptive". So, good luck with BitUSD and BitGold and bitreserve.
I am sure with enough money in the right hands, bitreserve could get those trademarks.
But what I'm wondering is: How could we make them our partners instead of our competitor?
-
Too bad. Those names are out in the wild, in use for up to two years by a couple dozen different organizations in the worldwide BitShares ecosystem. Good luck trying to claim prior use. :)
We've already been told that BitShares can't be registered for the same bogus reason that Bitcoin can't be registered - "Its too descriptive". So, good luck with BitUSD and BitGold and bitreserve.
I am sure with enough money in the right hands, bitreserve could get those trademarks.
But what I'm wondering is: How could we make them our partners instead of our competitor?
I wouldn't want to be a partner with someone that I don't trust.
-
This link explains a bit more about TM and ®: http://howconceptual.com/tm-symbol/ (http://howconceptual.com/tm-symbol/)
Anyone can use TM but ® is only once the name is actually registered. Adding TM may give some added IP protection?
-
They got the pretty visuals and marketing
https://changemoney.org/
https://bitreserve.org/en/blog/posts/bitreserve/our-bitmetal-collection-gets-bigger-introducing-adamantium-and-orichalcum
Yeah, visually it looks fantastic and with a few little publicity BitMetals thrown in.
Their adoption seems to be growing strongly but if you look at the PR stunt that they did with their crowdfunding. (Where 95%+ was contributed by one investor - https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=12769.msg168189#msg168189) I think there's a reasonable probability that they could be buying many of the BitAssets themselves for the next 6 months to make it look like their MOM BitAsset adoption is really high and fairly global.
There's a market for them but it will become very saturated and it's very different to the one for decentralised BitAssets.
-
Too bad. Those names are out in the wild, in use for up to two years by a couple dozen different organizations in the worldwide BitShares ecosystem. Good luck trying to claim prior use. :)
We've already been told that BitShares can't be registered for the same bogus reason that Bitcoin can't be registered - "Its too descriptive". So, good luck with BitUSD and BitGold and bitreserve.
I am sure with enough money in the right hands, bitreserve could get those trademarks.
But what I'm wondering is: How could we make them our partners instead of our competitor?
I wouldn't want to be a partner with someone that I don't trust.
Hard to disagree there...