Does Anyone Own the Bitcoin (BTC) Trademark?

[johnniewalker]

Hey everyone,
I'm seeing a lot of things for sale here in the marketplace with the Bitcoin logo or some kind of Bitcoin reference. Things like money clips, tie clips, physical bitcoins,  shirts, etc. Can anyone go to Cafe Press, make their own Bitcoin shit and sell it? I have to believe SOMEONE owns the copyright to the symbol and all things related. Am I right?

[1714039941]

1714039941

[1714039941]

1714039941

[RodeoX]

I think the main bitcoin symbol design is under the creative commons licenses or some other public domain. I could be wrong on that. There was also an attempt by some lawyer to copyright the word bitcoin, if I remember correctly. 

[johnniewalker]

fuck that guy. i hope you're right, thats what its all about.

[MPOE-PR]

Symbols and such are not copyrighted, they are trademarked. Artistic works are copyrighted.

Bitcoin is a trademark held by MtGox, on the dubious theory that "better they than someone else". There was some talk about them transferring this to the Foundation, but nothing came of it AFAIK. (And for the record, this forum is also hosted by them).

There's not to date been any enforcement attempts against any user, so you can probably go right ahead. The commonly used image/symbol for a Bitcoin however depicts a Thai Baht I think, which'd be a trademark of the Thai govt/central bank (I assume, haven't checked).

[fishface]

Symbols and such are not copyrighted, they are trademarked. Artistic works are copyrighted.

Bitcoin is a trademark held by MtGox, on the dubious theory that "better they than someone else". There was some talk about them transferring this to the Foundation, but nothing came of it AFAIK. (And for the record, this forum is also hosted by them).

There's not to date been any enforcement attempts against any user, so you can probably go right ahead. The commonly used image/symbol for a Bitcoin however depicts a Thai Baht I think, which'd be a trademark of the Thai govt/central bank (I assume, haven't checked).

Not sure how much of this is accurate... Trademarks initially come from, literally, "use in trade", meaning you are selling a product with this symbol attached (or at a minimum, you are using the symbol to represent your business). A key element of trademark protection is consumer identifiability... How readily identifiable is your product from your trademark? Can customers distinguish your product from others based on your mark?

As far as I know, no one has any form of trademark over the term bitcoin or the abbreviation btc. When we see the bitcoin symbol or some abbreviation, we think of bitcoin... Not some specific entity such as mt Gox.

Would be interested to see anything firm that indicates otherwise.

EDIT: formatting

[fishface]

I would even argue that any originally designed bitcoin symbol (even if simply a modified Thai baht) would indeed be eligible for copyright protection, and not trademark. Unless the concept of bitcoin is far removed from what I ever imagined, and Mt Gox sells a product called bitcoin that consumers identify based on this apparent trademark.

[fishface]

I thought of a good example of a real bitcoin-related trademark- I'd suggest Casascius holds at least a common law trademark in his name based on the trade of his coins, and (if necessary) could bring an action for dilution if others started minting coins with his name attached. Its a distinctive term indicating to customers the source of the coins. When we see coins labeled with the word Casascius, we know where they came from.

Interesting stuff when you think about it. Maybe its just me 

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

Symbols and such are not copyrighted, they are trademarked. Artistic works are copyrighted.

Bitcoin is a trademark held by MtGox, on the dubious theory that "better they than someone else".

Not sure how much of this is accurate...

It's not.

(from my memory) MtGox registered the trademark in Europe after some crazy lawyer a few years ago filed applications in the US, Europe, and Asia to trademark them. MtGox spent a ton of money fighting this guy and was able to take over the European trademark and the other countries apps were dropped.

(google the story, I don't have the sources on hand and some facts could be wrong)

[fishface]

Symbols and such are not copyrighted, they are trademarked. Artistic works are copyrighted.

Bitcoin is a trademark held by MtGox, on the dubious theory that "better they than someone else".

Not sure how much of this is accurate...

It's not.

(from my memory) MtGox registered the trademark in Europe after some crazy lawyer a few years ago filed applications in the US, Europe, and Asia to trademark them. MtGox spent a ton of money fighting this guy and was able to take over the European trademark and the other countries apps were dropped.

(google the story, I don't have the sources on hand and some facts could be wrong)

Ah yes, my inadvertent America-centrism led me to forget that much of the world is first to file and not first to use in commerce for trademark protection. A quick google and it seems this attorney Michael Pascazi either skipped Intellectual Property in law school or just slept through it... He basically went full retard trying to get bitcoin trademarked for himself.

[fishface]

If anyone is interested, this http://www.lextechnologiae.com/2011/07/15/bitcoins-trademarks-and-a-roadmap-for-the-bitcoin-community/ gets it exactly right.

[molecular]

Hey everyone,
I'm seeing a lot of things for sale here in the marketplace with the Bitcoin logo or some kind of Bitcoin reference. Things like money clips, tie clips, physical bitcoins,  shirts, etc. Can anyone go to Cafe Press, make their own Bitcoin shit and sell it? I have to believe SOMEONE owns the copyright to the symbol and all things related. Am I right?

last I checked mtgox was battling a firm from Hamburg, Germany



https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113520.0

http://esearch.oami.europa.eu/copla/trademark/data/010103646/download/112809178

http://esearch.oami.europa.eu/copla/trademark/data/010103646 (tibanne (mtgox) trademark "bitcoin")

[server]

Symbols and such are not copyrighted, they are trademarked. Artistic works are copyrighted.

Bitcoin is a trademark held by MtGox, on the dubious theory that "better they than someone else".

Not sure how much of this is accurate...

It's not.

(from my memory) MtGox registered the trademark in Europe after some crazy lawyer a few years ago filed applications in the US, Europe, and Asia to trademark them. MtGox spent a ton of money fighting this guy and was able to take over the European trademark and the other countries apps were dropped.

(google the story, I don't have the sources on hand and some facts could be wrong)

Registration record of the word 'BITCOIN'

and Vladimir registered 'Bitcoin Magazine'

[fishface]

European trademark law is really that fundamentally different from the US? I don't see how the word bitcoin is in any way indicative of the source of goods or services.

[crazy_rabbit]

This is something the Bitcoin Foundation should probably address.

[MPOE-PR]

Symbols and such are not copyrighted, they are trademarked. Artistic works are copyrighted.

Bitcoin is a trademark held by MtGox, on the dubious theory that "better they than someone else".

Not sure how much of this is accurate...

It's not.

(from my memory) MtGox registered the trademark in Europe after some crazy lawyer a few years ago filed applications in the US, Europe, and Asia to trademark them. MtGox spent a ton of money fighting this guy and was able to take over the European trademark and the other countries apps were dropped.

(google the story, I don't have the sources on hand and some facts could be wrong)

So how exactly is it the case that "it's not" when you basically say the exact same thing?

[fishface]

Symbols and such are not copyrighted, they are trademarked. Artistic works are copyrighted.

Bitcoin is a trademark held by MtGox, on the dubious theory that "better they than someone else".

Not sure how much of this is accurate...

It's not.

(from my memory) MtGox registered the trademark in Europe after some crazy lawyer a few years ago filed applications in the US, Europe, and Asia to trademark them. MtGox spent a ton of money fighting this guy and was able to take over the European trademark and the other countries apps were dropped.

(google the story, I don't have the sources on hand and some facts could be wrong)

So how exactly is it the case that "it's not" when you basically say the exact same thing?

Well its certainly not trademarked in the US...

[casascius]

Original Bitcoin logo was released here in the forums in late 2010 along with public domain release by its author.

https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=1756.0

[MPOE-PR]

Well its certainly not trademarked in the US...

You possibly are confusing two different things.

A trademark being registered in the EU, as in, on the EU registrar is enforceable in the US and in a few more jurisdictions signatory to whatever convention. So the holder of the EU trademark for Gizmos can sue anyone anywhere for breaking his trademark, including US nationals, be they real persons, corporations, w/e.

A trademark being registered for the EU, as in, to identify a business/product being offered in that geographical space, cannot prevent someone else from offering something else under the same name somewhere else (such as in the US, for instance).

The exact interplay of those two concepts when the Internet is concerned isn't really very well settled as of yet. In any event, seeing how the EU is both the more populous area and the larger economy it is reasonable to consider any trademark held in the EU as the categorical case, and any trademark held in the US as not worthy of the categorical case. That is to say, the fact that it is registered in the EU makes it registered. If it's also registered in the US that's fine, but of lesser importance.

[fishface]

Well its certainly not trademarked in the US...

You possibly are confusing two different things.

A trademark being registered in the EU, as in, on the EU registrar is enforceable in the US and in a few more jurisdictions signatory to whatever convention. So the holder of the EU trademark for Gizmos can sue anyone anywhere for breaking his trademark, including US nationals, be they real persons, corporations, w/e.

A trademark being registered for the EU, as in, to identify a business/product being offered in that geographical space, cannot prevent someone else from offering something else under the same name somewhere else (such as in the US, for instance).

The exact interplay of those two concepts when the Internet is concerned isn't really very well settled as of yet. In any event, seeing how the EU is both the more populous area and the larger economy it is reasonable to consider any trademark held in the EU as the categorical case, and any trademark held in the US as not worthy of the categorical case. That is to say, the fact that it is registered in the EU makes it registered. If it's also registered in the US that's fine, but of lesser importance.

I would suggest the OP was referring to enforceable US trademark law. Tibanne lacks the ability to successfully prevent others from selling bitcoin hats, shirts, bumper stickers, and various trinkets bearing the word bitcoin.

[fishface]

Original Bitcoin logo was released here in the forums in late 2010 along with public domain release by its author.

https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=1756.0

This is nice to see