MtGox owns the bitcoin name.

[Chakraball]

It seems Mr. Karpeles (MtGox) has owned the name for a while now, wonder why he didn't disclose this fact.
Filing date                    15 June 2011     
Date of entry in register      05 February 2012
Renewal date                   15 June 2021

The class 9 entry is interesting, I wonder if he could argue in a court that he owns the rights to the bitcoin client therefore Gavin's work?

Case details for trade mark EU010103646

List of goods and services

Class 9      Software for commerce over a global communications network.
Class 35     Electronic commerce services, namely providing information about products via telecommunication networks for advertising and sales purposes.
Class 38     Signal transmission for electronic commerce via telecommunication systems and data communication systems.
Class 42     Constructing an internet platform for electronic commerce.
Name and Address details

Holder's nameTibanne Co. Ltd.Cerulean Tower 15F 26-1 Sakuragaoka-Cho, Shibuya Tokyo, Japan, 150-8512
RepresentativeBAKER & MCKENZIE LLP100 New Bridge Street, London, United Kingdom, EC4V 6JA

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/4/EU010103646


Nice logo huh.

Case details for trade mark EU010050466

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/4/EU010050466


Also posted in legal as a reply.

[1715065847]

1715065847

[repentance]

It was disclosed at the time.  There was a lot of discussion about the pros and cons of them doing so and whether it was preferable to set-up a non-profit for such purposes.

At the time, people unassociated with Bitcoin were trying to register the trademark.

Just because something isn't stickied in red at the top of every forum doesn't mean it hasn't been disclosed.

https://mtgox.com/press_release_20111014.html

We would like to use this opportunity to formally announce that all trademarks related to the term “Bitcoin” filed for and obtained by Tibanne K.K will be made freely available to anyone to use for whatever purpose whatsoever, whether that be for non-profit or commercial endeavours.

They told the community they were applying for European trademarks prior to acquiring them.

It's also inaccurate to say that they own "the Bitcoin name".  They own a defined Bitcoin trademark.  For a whole heap of reasons - starting with prior use - the term "Bitcoin" can probably never be protected.

The IP issues regarding the official client were addressed long ago.

[Stephen Gornick]

It seems Mr. Karpeles (MtGox) has owned the name for a while now,

From another thread:

hey mr. karpeles please challenge me in court over this i'd love to show you how trademark law works

We registered the Bitcoin trademark to protect it and allow anyone to use Bitcoins without risking to be attacked by our Pascazi friends (or other people).

More people using Bitcoin freely is of course good for our business. Some US lawyer registering the trademark in various countries with plans to profit from the registration and not by allowing more people to use Bitcoin is bad for our business.

We didn't register the trademark for the purpose of preventing others from using the word Bitcoin, but to protect ourselves and our customers from people who have this kind of mindset.

[crazy_rabbit]

Make sense. They haven't sued us all for speaking "bitcoin" so far, so, wait long enough and it will become a generic word.

[jubalix]

it won't stand up in court

as it is too common usage, like hoover.

nothing interesting here

also it was common domain, long before it was registered, and I think that the open source licence in the software may prevent anyone claiming right or at least form an estoppel them from such rights.

they may have some TM rights to a particular get up/ look and feel

[repentance]

It was disclosed at the time.  There was a lot of discussion about the pros and cons of them doing so and whether it was preferable to set-up a non-profit for such purposes.

At the time, people unassociated with Bitcoin were trying to register the trademark.

Just because something isn't stickied in red at the top of every forum doesn't mean it hasn't been disclosed.

https://mtgox.com/press_release_20111014.html

We would like to use this opportunity to formally announce that all trademarks related to the term “Bitcoin” filed for and obtained by Tibanne K.K will be made freely available to anyone to use for whatever purpose whatsoever, whether that be for non-profit or commercial endeavours.

They told the community they were applying for European trademarks prior to acquiring them.

It's also inaccurate to say that they own "the Bitcoin name".  They own a defined Bitcoin trademark.  For a whole heap of reasons - starting with prior use - the term "Bitcoin" can probably never be protected.

The IP issues regarding the official client were addressed long ago.

if they have a registered TM then it is protected.

It's actually limited to the goods and services classes they have specified in their registration - 9, 35, 38 and 42.  These are internationally recognised classifications. 

Run a check on how many different registrations the Coca-Cola Corporation has had to file to protect their use of the word "Coke".  The original trademark applied only to carbonated soft drinks.  Pretty much every new merchandising use of their trademark has been accompanied by more trademark registrations (they own over 30,000 patents and trademarks world-wide). 

That in no way stops the coal industry and companies associated with it being able to use the term "coke", though, even in their business names and advertising - and Coca-Cola would stop them if it was possible, it's one of the most aggressive trademark defenders around.

[Chakraball]

It was disclosed at the time.  There was a lot of discussion about the pros and cons of them doing so and whether it was preferable to set-up a non-profit for such purposes.

At the time, people unassociated with Bitcoin were trying to register the trademark.

Just because something isn't stickied in red at the top of every forum doesn't mean it hasn't been disclosed.

https://mtgox.com/press_release_20111014.html

We would like to use this opportunity to formally announce that all trademarks related to the term “Bitcoin” filed for and obtained by Tibanne K.K will be made freely available to anyone to use for whatever purpose whatsoever, whether that be for non-profit or commercial endeavours.

They told the community they were applying for European trademarks prior to acquiring them.

It's also inaccurate to say that they own "the Bitcoin name".  They own a defined Bitcoin trademark.  For a whole heap of reasons - starting with prior use - the term "Bitcoin" can probably never be protected.

The IP issues regarding the official client were addressed long ago.

You forgot the last line of that announcement

"We will keep you apprised on these matters as soon as updates become available."
 
so yes I apologize for the line "wonder why he didn't disclose this fact", should have read "wonder why he didn't announce this fact"

However if MtGox were acting out of benevolence as Mark appears to state here

MagicalTux - May 18, 2012, 01:04:41 AM

"We registered the Bitcoin trademark to protect it and allow anyone to use Bitcoins without risking to be attacked by our Pascazi friends (or other people)."

and seeing as they run are members of the Bitcoin Foundation for the good of the bitcoin project, why not turn that trademark over to the foundation.

[skull88]

It seems Mr. Karpeles (MtGox) has owned the name for a while now, wonder why he didn't disclose this fact.

He did and it was to protect bitcoin from people with less good intentions.

Furthermore it is only protecting the name, not the client, the client is opensource and has this license: http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.phpy

[knybe]

If you go looking for drama... You'll usually find it.

[seleme]

Bitcoin trademark should be in hands of Bitcoin foundation no matter what intentions MtGox has.

[Zeke_Vermillion]

I would agree "bitcoin" is generic. Someone should file a cancellation proceeding against the registration in the UK (or whatever you call that proceeding there, I wouldn't know). Also even if it is not generic, I doubt that the word "bitcoin" uniquely identifies any particular person as a source of goods or services in commerce (again using US-law language). You may however be able to register a design mark, just a logo that happens to contain the word bitcoin. The specific design may be protectable if it uniquely identifies the registrant.

[luv2drnkbr]

You forgot the last line of that announcement

"We will keep you apprised on these matters as soon as updates become available."
 
so yes I apologize for the line "wonder why he didn't disclose this fact", should have read "wonder why he didn't announce this fact"

However if MtGox were acting out of benevolence as Mark appears to state here

MagicalTux - May 18, 2012, 01:04:41 AM

"We registered the Bitcoin trademark to protect it and allow anyone to use Bitcoins without risking to be attacked by our Pascazi friends (or other people)."

and seeing as they run are members of the Bitcoin Foundation for the good of the bitcoin project, why not turn that trademark over to the foundation.

Really?  You got caught being wrong and you're still looking for a reason to throw a hissy fit?  Dude, shut up.

[seleme]

Bitcoin trademark should be in hands of Bitcoin foundation no matter what intentions MtGox has.

There should not be a bitcoin TM at all because it is now a generic term.  if someone files one you petition to cancel, you don't file a questionable registration yourself while claiming you are doing it to prevent other questionable registrations.

There are many generic terms that are converted to trademarks. I can understand the reasons gox offered here but I don't think they should be one who own TM. I'm not law expert or close to it but I don't understand how they managed to register it.