OGNASTY now Guilty of trademark infringement.. When will this punk stop?

[BitcoinPenny]

In order to respect digicoinuser's request to take this conversation off his current sale thread, I will post my response here.

LOL at claiming adding a private key and a sticker to a DIY wallet and selling them at auction is trademark infringement or that I can’t use the name penny on a forum auction.  You guys get more desperate by the day.  

The trademark infringement has nothing to do with him reselling my own product. It is about him infringing on the trademarked name Bitcoin Penny™, as clearly seen in his original post:

Introducing the PROTOTYPE 2016 Bitcoin NastyPenny™ Commemorative Coins!

Additionally, there should have been a clear disclaimer that this was NOT a collaboration. He did avoid the use of the word "collaboration," but it still appears as one, so it should have been made clear that it was NOT a collaboration.

As for the doodle, that was free to him with his order of our prototype Mini Physicals. Everyone who order our prototype Mini Physicals received a doodle. His was not special in any way.

Bitcoinpenny also wanted to do a collaboration with me for a long time...

True. I like collabs, and at that point in time, OgNasty still had a good name.

...but after some issues I had with how he wanted to price gouge on future releases, I decided to no longer affiliate myself with his brand. Perhaps that’s where the sudden change of heart came from.

LOL That's funny. That's the same reason I decided not to collab with him on future products. He tried to price gouge me on having custom doodle coins made. Obviously, I passed on his offer.

He most definitely discussed this exact product with me many times in chats beforehand.  Surprised to see him lie about it now.

No, I did not. You are the liar here.

Regards,
Chris

EDIT:

Bitcoinpenny approached me asking me to do products like this, not the other way around.  I didn't infringe anything.  If he wants to change his story now, he is free to try and prove his case with a lawyer.  I suspect they will find his claim just as ludicrous.  

I may have approached OgNasty (I can't remember at this point, but I'll trust his memory about this) about doing a collaboration. That sounds like something I might do. I love collaborations. But to say that I approached him about doing "products like this" is a vague way to say that it wasn't this product, but that it was simply a collectible (maybe coin?) project. We NEVER discussed using one of our prototype Mini Physicals with his hand-scissored holo stickers. If my name were attached to the product, then Iwould have insisted on a pro-made holo sticker.

Additionally, I stated openly that "I chose to believe that it was a simple, unintentional, and excusable oversight on OgNasty's part." I would never bother to pursue legal action over a minor 10-coin infringement, especially for something that I viewed as forgivable. However, at this point, I'm beginning to think that it was not a simple, unintentional oversight on OgNasty's part.

[1715252573]

1715252573

[1715252573]

1715252573

[1715252573]

1715252573

[OgNasty]

...but after some issues I had with how he wanted to price gouge on future releases, I decided to no longer affiliate myself with his brand. Perhaps that’s where the sudden change of heart came from.

LOL That's funny. That's the same reason I decided not to collab with him on future products. He tried to price gouge me on having custom doodle coins made. Obviously, I passed on his offer.

He most definitely discussed this exact product with me many times in chats beforehand.  Surprised to see him lie about it now.

No, I did not. You are the liar here.

Regards,
Chris

I no longer have a good name?  I have the highest trust rating on this site...  You decided not to collaborate with me?  This is a flat out lie.  You have now lost all your credibility with me sir.  We both know I ended talks of collaborations with you when you tried to charge me a 400% markup to your retail pricing for your last roll of coins because they were supposedly sold out, only to then offer hundreds more for sale later.  Your business practices are why I wouldn't work with you anymore.  Not the other way around.  The only reason I didn't make your lies and price gouging attempts public at the time was because I figured it was better to just distance myself from you since others seemed to like your products.  That's the truth.

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.  Nice to see you finally go public as a member of the pitchfork club so people can be aware of your shady pricing attempts.  Your attempts to sell a manhole cover for thousands of dollars being a good example. 

[TMAN]

...but after some issues I had with how he wanted to price gouge on future releases, I decided to no longer affiliate myself with his brand. Perhaps that’s where the sudden change of heart came from.

LOL That's funny. That's the same reason I decided not to collab with him on future products. He tried to price gouge me on having custom doodle coins made. Obviously, I passed on his offer.

He most definitely discussed this exact product with me many times in chats beforehand.  Surprised to see him lie about it now.

No, I did not. You are the liar here.

Regards,
Chris

I no longer have a good name?  I have the highest trust rating on this site...  You decided not to collaborate with me?  This is a flat out lie.  You have now lost all your credibility with me sir.  We both know I ended talks of collaborations with you when you tried to charge me a 400% markup to your retail pricing for your last roll of coins because they were supposedly sold out, only to then offer hundreds more for sale later.  Your business practices are why I wouldn't work with you anymore.  Not the other way around.  The only reason I didn't make your lies and price gouging attempts public at the time was because I figured it was better to just distance myself from you since others seemed to like your products.  That's the truth.

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.  Nice to see you finally go public as a member of the pitchfork club so people can be aware of your shady pricing attempts.  Your attempts to sell a manhole cover for thousands of dollars being a good example. 

lies - attack - lies - wait? where is your only single defender? the greatly trusted Quickspazzer??

[OgNasty]

BitcoinPenny aka CJBianco did not complaint or accused OG for scam, then why this thread is here in scam accusation?? Moreover I find BitcoinPenny aka CJBianco ready for collaboration with Mr OG.

The real answer is that TMAN delusionally believes if I were disgraced that his buddies would somehow talk theymos into letting them replace me as the treasurer here.  So their little circle spends hours on a daily basis trying to sully my reputation.  It is pathetic, and I would avoid doing business with anyone who aligns themselves or condones this sort of behavior.

[BitcoinPenny]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

Regards,
Me

I believe that my point on this subject has been made clear. I have very little more to say. Have a good day.

Regards,
Chris

[TMAN]

BitcoinPenny aka CJBianco did not complaint or accused OG for scam, then why this thread is here in scam accusation?? Moreover I find BitcoinPenny aka CJBianco ready for collaboration with Mr OG.

The real answer is that TMAN delusionally believes if I were disgraced that his buddies would somehow talk theymos into letting them replace me as the treasurer here.  So their little circle spends hours on a daily basis trying to sully my reputation.  It is pathetic, and I would avoid doing business with anyone who aligns themselves or condones this sort of behavior.

No OG I and many others dislike you and your draconian attitude to everything.. You being Treasurer when you say you are better than multi sig is an insult to Bitcoin, your bullying from your DT-1 Position is also a centralized kick in the bollocks of Bitcoin..

Many people despise you but are scared to speak out for fear of the revenge red paint you give..

I also like to point out that you are far from a law abiding citizen..

[OgNasty]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

Regards,
Me

I believe that my point on this subject has been made clear. I have very little more to say. Have a good day.

Regards,
Chris

Thank you for making it crystal clear the type of person you are for those who may not have been aware.  This line of thinking is so anti-Bitcoin community, I'm just going to let it speak for itself.

[Quickseller]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

I am no expert on IP law, however I don’t think this would be an infringement. The infringement, if one exists would be from the use of “in code we trust” on the backside of the coin (he didn’t use your actual coin, did he? If so then I don’t think there is any grounds to argue infringement) where it said “in code we trust” and similar.

As I mentioned previously, additional research needs to be done on IP law to give an opinion one way or another.

Cases of trademark infringement are rarely open and shut and as such these types of disputes can result in litigation, the outcome of which is often unclear until a ruling has been made.

[TMAN]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

I am no expert on IP law, however I don’t think this would be an infringement. The infringement, if one exists would be from the use of “in code we trust” on the backside of the coin (he didn’t use your actual coin, did he? If so then I don’t think there is any grounds to argue infringement) where it said “in code we trust” and similar.

As I mentioned previously, additional research needs to be done on IP law to give an opinion one way or another.

Cases of trademark infringement are rarely open and shut and as such these types of disputes can result in litigation, the outcome of which is often unclear until a ruling has been made.

He did use a bitcoinpenny coin - so you agree that is trademark infringement

[Quickseller]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

I am no expert on IP law, however I don’t think this would be an infringement. The infringement, if one exists would be from the use of “in code we trust” on the backside of the coin (he didn’t use your actual coin, did he? If so then I don’t think there is any grounds to argue infringement) where it said “in code we trust” and similar.

As I mentioned previously, additional research needs to be done on IP law to give an opinion one way or another.

Cases of trademark infringement are rarely open and shut and as such these types of disputes can result in litigation, the outcome of which is often unclear until a ruling has been made.

He did use a bitcoinpenny coin - so you agree that is trademark infringement

No. I am not sure how I could have been more clear in my post..

[TMAN]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

I am no expert on IP law, however I don’t think this would be an infringement. The infringement, if one exists would be from the use of “in code we trust” on the backside of the coin (he didn’t use your actual coin, did he? If so then I don’t think there is any grounds to argue infringement) where it said “in code we trust” and similar.

As I mentioned previously, additional research needs to be done on IP law to give an opinion one way or another.

Cases of trademark infringement are rarely open and shut and as such these types of disputes can result in litigation, the outcome of which is often unclear until a ruling has been made.

He did use a bitcoinpenny coin - so you agree that is trademark infringement

No. I am not sure how I could have been more clear in my post..

by not making it?? you provide 0 value

[Red Painter]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

I am no expert on IP law, however I don’t think this would be an infringement. The infringement, if one exists would be from the use of “in code we trust” on the backside of the coin (he didn’t use your actual coin, did he? If so then I don’t think there is any grounds to argue infringement) where it said “in code we trust” and similar.

As I mentioned previously, additional research needs to be done on IP law to give an opinion one way or another.

Cases of trademark infringement are rarely open and shut and as such these types of disputes can result in litigation, the outcome of which is often unclear until a ruling has been made.

I'm not an IP lawyer either but doing a minor change doesn't get you a free pass. Like I can't be like Quick Bestseller, as I did very little changes, even the courts/juries are not dumb otherwise we'd have a metric ton of "technically" not infringement names, trademarks, say Hungry Games, A Ballad of Ice and Fire, etc

But again the actual results depends on the actual litigation the extent of the damage done (AKA how much has the guilty person made off the item), what the licenses were there on the product, was there a contract between the parties which implied consent, etc.

[Quickseller]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

I am no expert on IP law, however I don’t think this would be an infringement. The infringement, if one exists would be from the use of “in code we trust” on the backside of the coin (he didn’t use your actual coin, did he? If so then I don’t think there is any grounds to argue infringement) where it said “in code we trust” and similar.

As I mentioned previously, additional research needs to be done on IP law to give an opinion one way or another.

Cases of trademark infringement are rarely open and shut and as such these types of disputes can result in litigation, the outcome of which is often unclear until a ruling has been made.

He did use a bitcoinpenny coin - so you agree that is trademark infringement

No. I am not sure how I could have been more clear in my post..

by not making it?? you provide 0 value

I don’t think you understand what trademark infringement is.

[game-protect]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

Correct!

Trademark: "Mercedes Benz"

Trademark infringement: "Mercedes Nasty Benz"  

What an insult!

[Bardman]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

Correct!

Trademark: "Mercedes Benz"

Trademark infringement: "Mercedes Nasty Benz"  

What an insult!

However it doesn't work like that. First of all you can't claim to have copyrights on the word ''bitcoin'' nor the word ''penny'' They only have copyrights on  ''BitcoinPenny'' as a whole, not separate. You can't claim copyright if someone decides to use ''bitcoin'' or ''penny'' just like ''wholefoods'' would not be able to claim copyright if someone uses the word food.

[game-protect]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

Correct!

Trademark: "Mercedes Benz"

Trademark infringement: "Mercedes Nasty Benz"  

What an insult!

However it doesn't work like that. First of all you can't claim to have copyrights on the word ''bitcoin'' nor the word ''penny'' They only have copyrights on  ''BitcoinPenny'' as a whole, not separate. You can't claim copyright if someone decides to use ''bitcoin'' or ''penny'' just like ''wholefoods'' would not be able to claim copyright if someone uses the word food.

Do you mean if someone uses "BtcoinPenny" = trademark infringement and if someone uses "Bitcoin Penny" = no trademark infringement?

Does he claim copyright because someone uses "bitcoin" or "penny" or does he claim copyright because someone uses both and added Nasty between it?

[Quickseller]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

Correct!

Trademark: "Mercedes Benz"

Trademark infringement: "Mercedes Nasty Benz" 

What an insult!

However it doesn't work like that. First of all you can't claim to have copyrights on the word ''bitcoin'' nor the word ''penny'' They only have copyrights on  ''BitcoinPenny'' as a whole, not separate. You can't claim copyright if someone decides to use ''bitcoin'' or ''penny'' just like ''wholefoods'' would not be able to claim copyright if someone uses the word food.

Do you mean if someone uses "BtcoinPenny" = trademark infringement and if someone uses "Bitcoin Penny" = no trademark infringement?

Does he claim copyright because someone uses "bitcoin" or "penny" or does he claim copyright because someone uses both and added Nasty between it?

As far as I can tell, the only part of the trademark used was the word “penny”. (Someone can correct me if I missed something).

[BitcoinPenny]

First of all you can't claim to have copyrights on the word ''bitcoin'' nor the word ''penny'' They only have copyrights on  ''BitcoinPenny'' as a whole, not separate. You can't claim copyright if someone decides to use ''bitcoin'' or ''penny'' just like ''wholefoods'' would not be able to claim copyright if someone uses the word food.

True, sort of. You're right that no person/company can trademark the individual words "bitcoin" or "penny." However, they can trademark the combination of those words, as in "Bitcoin Penny™." It's the same as the words "home" and "depot." Individually, they are non-trademarkable. Together, they are 100% trademarked.

Additionally, it's not just the words themselves that carry trademark weight. It's the category of product or service where that trademark is used. I am totally within my rights to create a hand-knit woolen doll that looks like a snow monster and call it the "Yeti" doll. However, I can not create a new beer cooler and call it the "Yeti" cooler without infringing upon an established trademark.

Does he claim copyright because someone uses "bitcoin" or "penny" or does he claim copyright because someone uses both and added Nasty between it?

It's trademark infringement "because someone uses both and added Nasty between it."

In court, the question would be asked, "Would the average, reasonable consumer expect that the 'Bitcoin NastyPenny™' was affiliated with 'Bitcoin Penny™'?" If the answer is "yes," then it's trademark infringement. That's the whole reason for trademark law--to protect unknowing consumers from purchasing a service or product from one person/business while thinking it was affiliated with a different person/business. That's why they invented trademarks, to differentiate the service or product of one business from the service or product from another business. It's really very simple.

In this particular case, it boils down to the above question: "Would the average, reasonable consumer expect that the 'Bitcoin NastyPenny™' was affiliated with 'Bitcoin Penny™'?"

If the answer is "yes," then it's trademark infringement. If the answer is "no," then it's not trademark infringement.

Personally, I believe the answer is "yes." However, since we're not taking this to court, then it's really a moot point.

Regards,
Me

PS -- To play devil's advocate (because I find doing so exercises the mind), one might attempt to argue on OgNasty's behalf that the use of "Bitcoin NastyPenny™" should be allowable via protected parody laws. It may be a stretch to consider the product as a legally-defined parody, but it's worth considering as a possible exemption from trademark infringement.

[TheNewAnon135246]

You don't have a trademark on the name NastyPenny.

Of course, I don't have a trademark on the name "NastyPenny." I never claimed to have one on the name "NastyPenny." However, I do have a trademark on "Bitcoin Penny." Inserting the word "Nasty" into the middle of "Bitcoin Penny" is the infringement.

Correct!

Trademark: "Mercedes Benz"

Trademark infringement: "Mercedes Nasty Benz"  

What an insult!

However it doesn't work like that. First of all you can't claim to have copyrights on the word ''bitcoin'' nor the word ''penny'' They only have copyrights on  ''BitcoinPenny'' as a whole, not separate. You can't claim copyright if someone decides to use ''bitcoin'' or ''penny'' just like ''wholefoods'' would not be able to claim copyright if someone uses the word food.

Do you mean if someone uses "BtcoinPenny" = trademark infringement and if someone uses "Bitcoin Penny" = no trademark infringement?

Does he claim copyright because someone uses "bitcoin" or "penny" or does he claim copyright because someone uses both and added Nasty between it?

As far as I can tell, the only part of the trademark used was the word “penny”. (Someone can correct me if I missed something).

This auction is for 10 individual Prototype Bitcoin NastyPenny™ Commemorative Coins.  Only 10 of these 0.01 BTC loaded coins were created by OgNasty and engraved with 30-character (vanity) mini-keys secured by Nasty holograms.

As far as I can tell, that's more than just using the word "penny".

[game-protect]

This auction is for 10 individual Prototype Bitcoin NastyPenny™ Commemorative Coins.  Only 10 of these 0.01 BTC loaded coins were created by OgNasty and engraved with 30-character (vanity) mini-keys secured by Nasty holograms.

OgNasty claims that Bitcoin NastyPenny™ is a registered trademark?

Where is his trademark registration?

Also, to avoid misunderstoods, whether you write it like this Bitcoin NastyPenny™ or like this BitcoinNastyPenny™ or even like this Bitcoin Nasty Penny™ does not play any role.