Bitcoin forks stealing Bitcoin name, Boo Hoo!

[Exister]

Intellectual property law is a scam

In the case of the name Bitcoin, it does not protect what ought to be protected. Nor has it in the past protected what ought to be protected or lead to the outcomes that were promised by politicians to the public.

Copyrights

Was promised to incentivize artistic works allowing creativity to flourish and rich cultural development. With the advent of internet publishing the negative effects of copyrights have begun to ease up, but the damage has already been done.

It has never protected the vulnerable because the historical high expense of publication would lead to the transfer of the intellectual property rights from the creator to the publisher.

Risk averse dominating media industries have stagnated popular culture and contributed greatly to the decline of human civilization worldwide by inhibiting derivative works, enabling soft censorship and recycling content that caters to a vacuous audience.

The powerful centralized mass media industry has become an invaluable partner for government to covertly disseminate its vile propaganda.

Even now copyright trolls swarm like locusts ravaging our precious burgeoning new internet media communities.

Patents

Was promised to incentivize innovation, had the opposite and disastrous effect. Ignorant that technological works are derivative from previous advancements, patents impose an artificial scarcity on the fruits of technological ingenuity.

It has led to an incredible loss of innovation by incentivizing large corporations to allocate ridiculous amounts of money to spend on nonproductive IP portfolios and bitter legal battles.

Where corporations would have otherwise used this money on r&d.

Trademark

Long considered a safe excuse to defend IP laws due to relatively uncontroversial outcomes. It is generally ignored that trademark seeks to regulate over domains that are irrelevant to IP. Identity.

Now that we have decentralized systems that do not bear any single entity, the failure of policy has reared its ugly head once again.

The name Bitcoin is being taken via hard fork and used upon coins that are not truly Bitcoin. and it leads to an unjustifiable transfer of valuation through externalities imposed on the cryptocurrency ecosystem.

This Time, stay out of it government! This issue will resolve itself without intervention. And any intervention has been proven to lead nowhere good.

[2fresh]

Nobody owns the name bitcoin, and it's all open source software,  we will see forks in all shapes and letters. This has been happening for years already.

[bitorama]

so bitcoin is an intellectual property for whom ? Core team ? Satoshi ?

[Exister]

...

Now that we have decentralized systems that do not bear any single entity, the failure of policy has reared its ugly head once again.

...

Yes, i think i covered that point.

[bitjoin]

Its not just direct forks of bitcoin but aren't some newly created alt cryptos also called bitcoin whatever etc.  Its not been a problem up to now with them so in theory it should not matter. People get slightly concerned that roger ver owns bitcoin.com though so there is a slight threat of watering down the original bitcoin with these "copies".

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I don't agree that there's been any infringement,  nor do I think the CIA (satoshi) would prosecute anyway, but I definitely think these idiotic forks could be a little more original with their names.  Branding is everything, especially when a coin is going up against bitcoin as a competitor.  Doesn't that make sense?

Bitcoin Cash has got to be the stupidest name, and Bitcoin Gold is a very close second.  "Bitcoin" shouldn't even be in the name IMO.

[Cranidos]

The community decides who will be the real Bitcoin. If the community decides that the newly born coin will be the real Bitcoin then it will be. So regardless if the new fork steals the name of Bitcoin, Bitcoin will still be Bitcoin. So I guess there is no point whether they get Bitcoin's name or not, the community will still be the one who'll decide.

I believe Bitcoin was not patented in the first place so all can use the name Bitcoin.

[maku]

I believe Bitcoin was not patented in the first place so all can use the name Bitcoin.

Wasn't Craig Wright working his ass to patent it back in the day? I have no idea if he succeeded with that, but I know that patent law is kinda random.
In the US you don't need to be the original inventor of something - you just need to be the first to patent it. S
o in a couple years when the patent office will process this case, we may wake up to see Craig Wright is the rightful patent owner of the blockchain idea

[btcprospecter]

The name is not patented but we all know the true bitcoin. Others may try and ride on the back of its success and will ultimately fail.

[Fatso123111]

I'm just amped for Bitcoin Platinum followed by Bitcoin Silver and Bitcoin Orange and super Bitcoin and ultimate Bitcoin.

[BitHodler]

Others may try and ride on the back of its success and will ultimately fail.

People don't give a single damn about these hidden agenda forks, and that's exactly how it should be. The legacy chain is the only way to go, and for that reason all forks will eventually dry out and get abandoned entirely.

I however see signs of a just starting fork trend, which will result in more and more forks popping up in the coming years ~ the community doesn't seem to be bothered much by this due to their greed.

Before the 1st of August, forks were looked at as being a horrible happening for Bitcoin, but now they see there is some money to be made, they are all in favor of more forks, and for that reason, exchanges too.

[Ultegra134]

There's no infringement for Bitcoin's "Trademark". The other forks may use a similar name, based on the word Bitcoin, but are quite different in structure. Especially latest one, Bitcoin Gold is based on the Equihash algorithm for mining. Every coin created by forks are simple Altcoins that do share some qualities with Bitcoin.

[exstasie]

Others may try and ride on the back of its success and will ultimately fail.

People don't give a single damn about these hidden agenda forks, and that's exactly how it should be. The legacy chain is the only way to go, and for that reason all forks will eventually dry out and get abandoned entirely.

That's not true at all. It might be clear that the forks won't overtake Bitcoin, but it's very clear that people give a damn. BTG/BTC is trading at 0.02071, and it spiked as high as 0.5! The market also dumped yesterday as soon as the BTG snapshot occurred. Altcoins also rallied across the board at the same time. So, to say that nobody cares is to ignore reality.

Forks with no innovation and developer talent will eventually be abandoned. But this is not an efficient process. Many newbies will be fleeced in the meantime. This is no different than altcoins several years back. Do they take away from BTC investment? Absolutely! Will they die off? Many will, but good luck thinking that Bitcoin will be the only cryptocurrency that survives. That ship has sailed.

[HODLife]

They might be using the same name by they are far from the same platform. Bitcoin has so much power, money, and knowledge backing it that going against is pretty much suicidal. So let them try