Someone Random Trademarked "bitcoin" : Now we can't use the term?

[sadpandatech]

Wanna see something funny?  Apparently magellan, the company who is attempting to trademark Bitcoin has not kept up their own trademark registration.
*to the letter head creator* Anyone outside the US have an addy I can mail correspondence to? ;p
http://www.trademarkia.com/magellan-capital-77155490.html

[1713264145]

1713264145

[1713264145]

1713264145

[1713264145]

1713264145

[sadpandatech]

ewwww,
http://tdr.uspto.gov/jsp/DocumentViewPage.jsp?85353491/SPE20110625085727/Specimen/1/22-Jun-2011/sn/false#p=1

I believe this is "Michel's" Linked in account.

http://fr.linkedin.com/pub/patrice-mouchon/6/222/b23

he's certainly in the right occupation to fit the bill.... jerks, all of em....

[Zerbie]

ewwww,
http://tdr.uspto.gov/jsp/DocumentViewPage.jsp?85353491/SPE20110625085727/Specimen/1/22-Jun-2011/sn/false#p=1

It looks as if Cline M. Pascazi is attempting to sell all BitCoins to "Michel Mouchon" at a price of $17.50.  That would be around $367.5M.  The letter probably is an attempt to establish not only the writes of the trademark but all the "currency" it represents.  If I'm reading this correctly, they are attempting to establish ownership of the entire project.

[casascius]

I have digitally signed and securely timestamped PDF contracts where I have consummated Bitcoin deals well in advance of 6/22/11.

[sadpandatech]

ewwww,
http://tdr.uspto.gov/jsp/DocumentViewPage.jsp?85353491/SPE20110625085727/Specimen/1/22-Jun-2011/sn/false#p=1

It looks as if Cline M. Pascazi is attempting to sell all BitCoins to "Michel Mouchon" at a price of $17.50.  That would be around $367.5M.  The letter probably is an attempt to establish not only the writes of the trademark but all the "currency" it represents.  If I'm reading this correctly, they are attempting to establish ownership of the entire project.

nah, you're 'reaching' a bit there I believe, m8.

[phillipsjk]

E-mail sent:

Code:

To: Info at pascazilaw.com
Cc: TMFeedback at uspto.gov
Subject: Bitcoin Trademark dated 20110622 is invalid

[-- PGP output follows (current time: Wed 06 Jul 2011 08:00:53 PM MDT) --]
gpg: Signature made Wed 06 Jul 2011 07:57:17 PM MDT using DSA key ID 1CFDA27B
gpg: Good signature from "James Kenneth Phillips (TPM Consultant) <james at phillipsjk.ca>"
[-- End of PGP output --]

[-- The following data is signed --]

Hello,

It has come to my attention that you have applied for a Wordmark
"BITCOIN"[1]. The peer-to-peer crypto-currency project has been ongoing
for two years now: greatly predating your trademark claim. For most of
that time, the term "Bitcoin" has been used in commerce (in the United
States, among other countries).

Prior to that the domain bitcoin.com was used for an unrelated
electronic currency. According to the WayBack Machine[2], the domain was
registered by "ivntech.com" from June 2003 to February 2005. The page
appears to be Korean.

Because of the widespread use of the term "Bitcoin" when describing a
specific peer-to-peer crypto-currency with a public transaction history,
I suggest you withdraw your trademark application.

Sincerely,

James Phillips

[1] http://rogerwehbe.com/?p=73
[2] http://classic-web.archive.org/web/*/http://bitcoin.com


--
OpenPGP Public Key: http://phillipsjk.ca/signature0611.txt

[-- End of signed data --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFOFRJ9PPYMXhz9onsRAi0tAJ4hy6MFPiapyuDiimJx5o4UiK1dhQCeJ29t
tmvUFxOCgqe/PCAnc4U0uKs=
=za1p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Isepick]

Magellan Capital Advisors is registered to the exact same physical location as the lawyer's office that filed the application. Lawyer's web page is here. So not a real banking outfit, just some scumbag lawyer.

The exchanges (especially BX and Tradehill) should be all over this douche, since he will no doubt target them first...Gox is in Japan, so it may be a bit harder for him to fuck with.

This guy is a lawyer, so he can file all the paperwork he wants, it only costs him his personal time and toner. Mass C&D form letters will probably go out if they let him have the trademark.

[sadpandatech]

Magellan Capital Advisors is registered to the exact same physical location as the lawyer's office that filed the application. Lawyer's web page is here. So not a real banking outfit, just some scumbag lawyer.

The exchanges (especially BX and Tradehill) should be all over this douche, since he will no doubt target them first...Gox is in Japan, so it may be a bit harder for him to fuck with.

This guy is a lawyer, so he can file all the paperwork he wants, it only costs him his personal time and toner. Mass C&D form letters will probably go out if they let him have the trademark.

exactly, and its his wife's signature at the bottom of that 'offer to sell' letter.(for lack of a better title since it does not actually convey any kind of trade or agreement between the parties, but implies they 'CAN' sell some Bitcoin. funny shit imho)

[Zerbie]

Anyone filing a protest may also want to include Google trend screenshots to further prove the use of "BitCoin" prior to 6-22-11.

[Alex Beckenham]

I didn't mean to hijack the thread, but I think the domain issue is still on-topic, as I was genuinely concerned what affect this would have on my ownership of them.

Where people have mis-understood me is if they think I was saying that's the main issue... it's obviously not.

[hippich]

E-mail sent:

Code:

To: Info@pascazilaw.com
Cc: TMFeedback@uspto.gov
Subject: Bitcoin Trademark dated 20110622 is invalid

[-- PGP output follows (current time: Wed 06 Jul 2011 08:00:53 PM MDT) --]
gpg: Signature made Wed 06 Jul 2011 07:57:17 PM MDT using DSA key ID 1CFDA27B
gpg: Good signature from "James Kenneth Phillips (TPM Consultant) <james@phillipsjk.ca>"
[-- End of PGP output --]

[-- The following data is signed --]

Hello,

It has come to my attention that you have applied for a Wordmark
"BITCOIN"[1]. The peer-to-peer crypto-currency project has been ongoing
for two years now: greatly predating your trademark claim. For most of
that time, the term "Bitcoin" has been used in commerce (in the United
States, among other countries).

Prior to that the domain bitcoin.com was used for an unrelated
electronic currency. According to the WayBack Machine[2], the domain was
registered by "ivntech.com" from June 2003 to February 2005. The page
appears to be Korean.

Because of the widespread use of the term "Bitcoin" when describing a
specific peer-to-peer crypto-currency with a public transaction history,
I suggest you withdraw your trademark application.

Sincerely,

James Phillips

[1] http://rogerwehbe.com/?p=73
[2] http://classic-web.archive.org/web/*/http://bitcoin.com


--
OpenPGP Public Key: http://phillipsjk.ca/signature0611.txt

[-- End of signed data --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFOFRJ9PPYMXhz9onsRAi0tAJ4hy6MFPiapyuDiimJx5o4UiK1dhQCeJ29t
tmvUFxOCgqe/PCAnc4U0uKs=
=za1p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Repeated.

2All: Rinse and repeat!

[phillipsjk]

Keep in mind that e-mails sent to "TMFeedback at uspto.gov" don't enter the official record

Edit:

Please note that the proper procedure relative to the USPTO is to file a Letter of Protest.   See form #10 on this page: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/petition_forms.jsp.

We would not actually do anything with the email below.

Thank you.

TMFeedback Support Team

[sadpandatech]

I didn't mean to hijack the thread, but I think the domain issue is still on-topic, as I was genuinely concerned what affect this would have on my ownership of them.

Where people have mis-understood me is if they think I was saying that's the main issue... it's obviously not.

  I apologize if it were one of my hammered out responses that made the domain thing seem completely off-topic. I can see where you would be concerned.

  I can't really give much legal guidance in way of trademark law and how it would affect a domain. In my opinion the best some greasy lawyer type could do IF they held a trademark would be to use it to try and convince unwitting hosts to temporarily take down a site. Thats IF someone held a trademark on a service or such that the site was offering and IF a trademark in and of itself would be enough to warrant such things.

  I really wish I had more answers, anything I can say is matter of mostly opinion and from what limited reading I have done thus far. Being that I don't have any stake business wise in Bitcoin I don't really have the time or resources to look too much into it beyond what is readily available to understand without 4+ years of law school under ones belt.


  Anyone here with some professional knowledge in such areas care to enlighten us or look into this further?

[sadpandatech]

Keep in mind that e-mails sent to "TMFeedback at uspto.gov" don't enter the official record.

If I read the LoP correctly, nither does the text submited there, but any attachements will.

[kjj]

Magellan Capital Advisors is registered to the exact same physical location as the lawyer's office that filed the application. Lawyer's web page is here. So not a real banking outfit, just some scumbag lawyer.

The exchanges (especially BX and Tradehill) should be all over this douche, since he will no doubt target them first...Gox is in Japan, so it may be a bit harder for him to fuck with.

This guy is a lawyer, so he can file all the paperwork he wants, it only costs him his personal time and toner. Mass C&D form letters will probably go out if they let him have the trademark.

This is very normal.  Until a corporation is large enough to require a dedicated legal department with several full time lawyers, the state filings almost always list an attorney's address.  Basically, a legal entity is required to have a registered agent that accepts legal documents.

Despite all of the paranoia in this thread, this filing is pretty much meaningless and will go nowhere.  And even if it did, it would have almost no impact on anyone.

[sadpandatech]

Magellan Capital Advisors is registered to the exact same physical location as the lawyer's office that filed the application. Lawyer's web page is here. So not a real banking outfit, just some scumbag lawyer.

The exchanges (especially BX and Tradehill) should be all over this douche, since he will no doubt target them first...Gox is in Japan, so it may be a bit harder for him to fuck with.

This guy is a lawyer, so he can file all the paperwork he wants, it only costs him his personal time and toner. Mass C&D form letters will probably go out if they let him have the trademark.

This is very normal.  Until a corporation is large enough to require a dedicated legal department with several full time lawyers, the state filings almost always list an attorney's address.  Basically, a legal entity is required to have a registered agent that accepts legal documents.

Despite all of the paranoia in this thread, this filing is pretty much meaningless and will go nowhere.  And even if it did, it would have almost no impact on anyone.

Thats very true, except in this instance the lawyer is not listed as an agent, he is the applicant and his wife's name is signed at the bottom of the sales letter....
On your second point, you're hopefully right.

[payb.tc]

this has been submitted but not posted at slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/submission/1702382/Lawyer-Attempts-to-Trademark-Bitcoin

i'm not sure how it works with posting comments before the whole story submission has been posted though.

[sadpandatech]

this has been submitted but not posted at slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/submission/1702382/Lawyer-Attempts-to-Trademark-Bitcoin

i'm not sure how it works with posting comments before the whole story submission has been posted though.

and holy crap, more interesting info from the pdf that the slashdot article links to on the attorney's website. The wife's middle name just happens to be the last name of who they sent the letter to in Paris....

http://www.pascazilaw.com/files/New_Coin_of_the_Realm_062311.pdf



edited for crap grammar.

[twobits]

The only reason someone hasn't hijacked "Linux" is because Linus trademarked it.

-MarkM- (I am not a lawyer. I don't think Linus is either.)

Actually, he did not, and someone else indeed did.  He did cave to the outrage and assigned it to Linus later thankfully.

[twobits]

What I'm wondering is if this will put at risk .com domain names that contain the word 'bitcoin'.

Most of mine were registered before his 'first use' date, but a few of them more recently.

Yes,  the default under the arbitration rules is a win for a tm holder.  It is however not a cheap process for them.