Bitcoin Foundation: Oppose trademark of "Bitcoin" on clothing

[nimda]

Seems like this is the perfect opportunity for the Bitcoin Foundation to use its resources.

Someone is trying to trademark "Bitcoin" on clothing:

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/97/bitcoin-86097068.html

[BitTrade]

Seems like this is the perfect opportunity for the Bitcoin Foundation to use its resources.

Someone is trying to trademark "Bitcoin" on clothing:

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/97/bitcoin-86097068.html

An opposition won't be necessary.  The application will 99% get rejected, since the term "bitcoin" will be deemed descriptive or even generic.  On the small chance it slips by the examiners, then an opposition would be in order.

[howzar]

This is just extreme greed,though they know they will most likely even pass the first line of examination yet the did it!
anyway it's tempting to get such a popular words as yours,it's like getting google.com domain after it expires

[BittBurger]

Seems like this is the perfect opportunity for the Bitcoin Foundation to use its resources.

Someone is trying to trademark "Bitcoin" on clothing:

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/97/bitcoin-86097068.html

An opposition won't be necessary.  The application will 99% get rejected, since the term "bitcoin" will be deemed descriptive or even generic.  On the small chance it slips by the examiners, then an opposition would be in order.

Not sure I agree with this.  If you're saying that the word is too common to trademark.  There's always the first person to file the trademark for a term.  And they're the ones who get it.  And Bitcoin wasn't even a word 3 years ago.  Let alone trusting the evaluators to be familiar with it even today ... It will be rejected if someone else has trademarked it but not sure it would for any other reason?  

[BittBurger]

I checked the US Trademark database and several variations have successfully been registerd, but someone registered "Bitcoin" already then abandoned it (fools!)

So this guy may very well get it.  And he will be extremely wealthy ...

Not sure if this link will work for anyone but me:  http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4805:9m8v89.2.16

Word Mark    BITCOIN
Goods and Services    (ABANDONED) IC 036. US 100 101 102. G & S: Financial services, namely, providing a virtual currency for use by members of an on-line community via a global computer network. FIRST USE: 20110622. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20110622
Standard Characters Claimed    
Mark Drawing Code    (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number    85353491
Filing Date    June 22, 2011
Current Basis    1A
Original Filing Basis    1A
Owner    (APPLICANT) Magellan Capital Advisors LLC DBA Magellan Capital LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY NEW YORK Suite D 1065 Main Street Fishkill NEW YORK 12524
Attorney of Record    Michael S. Pascazi, Esq.
Disclaimer    NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "COIN OR BIT" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark    SERVICE MARK
Register    PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator    DEAD
Abandonment Date    July 7, 2011

----------------------------
THE OTHERS......

1    86097068       BITCOIN          TSDR    LIVE  <----------------- the current applicant
2    86012793       EASY BITCOIN       TSDR    LIVE
3    86093640       AMERICAN BITCOIN    TSDR    LIVE
4    86075129       BITCOIN INVESTMENT TRUST    TSDR    LIVE
5    85877951        MILLY BITCOIN       TSDR    LIVE
6    85974859       WINKLEVOSS BITCOIN TRUST    TSDR    LIVE
7    85934674       BIVALENT BITCOIN JEWELRY    TSDR    LIVE
8    85887743       M-BITCOIN          TSDR    LIVE
9    85798479        BITCOIN MAGAZINE    TSDR    LIVE
10    85887676       BITCOIN MOBILE MONEY    TSDR    LIVE
11    85883441       BITCOIN          TSDR    DEAD
12    85888809       BITCOIN COMPUTER    TSDR    LIVE
13    85373341       BITCOIN APPLIANCE    TSDR    DEAD
14    85405348       BITCOIN MERCHANT SOLUTIONS    TSDR    DEAD
15    85405343       MERCHANT SOLUTIONS FOR THE BITCOIN CURRENCY    TSDR    DEAD
16    85353491       BITCOIN          TSDR    DEAD

[RoadToHell]

Seems like this is the perfect opportunity for the Bitcoin Foundation to use its resources.

Someone is trying to trademark "Bitcoin" on clothing:

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/97/bitcoin-86097068.html

An opposition won't be necessary.  The application will 99% get rejected, since the term "bitcoin" will be deemed descriptive or even generic.  On the small chance it slips by the examiners, then an opposition would be in order.

Not sure I agree with this.  If you're saying that the word is too common to trademark.  There's always the first person to file the trademark for a term.  And they're the ones who get it.  And Bitcoin wasn't even a word 3 years ago.  Let alone trusting the evaluators to be familiar with it even today ... It will be rejected if someone else has trademarked it but not sure it would for any other reason?  

The term was used in the Sathoshi white paper in 2008.
http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

But the Foundation would do good by submitting examples of prior art and usage BEFORE the trademark is granted.  Once the trademark is granted, the expense goes up and the trademark owner can go after others with lawsuits in the interim.

[BittBurger]

It's a tough call.

Nobody owns bitcoin.

And I successfully registered a trademark akin to:  BaseballTalk recently.

Can't get more generic and "previously used" than that.  It got approved, because of what I was planning to use it for.  Which was unique.

[pening]

Seems like this is the perfect opportunity for the Bitcoin Foundation to use its resources.

Someone is trying to trademark "Bitcoin" on clothing:

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/97/bitcoin-86097068.html

An opposition won't be necessary.  The application will 99% get rejected, since the term "bitcoin" will be deemed descriptive or even generic.  On the small chance it slips by the examiners, then an opposition would be in order.

one word: Diesel

there are many other examples, many brands are based on creators names, which are generic and widespread.

[BitTrade]

Seems like this is the perfect opportunity for the Bitcoin Foundation to use its resources.

Someone is trying to trademark "Bitcoin" on clothing:

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/97/bitcoin-86097068.html

An opposition won't be necessary.  The application will 99% get rejected, since the term "bitcoin" will be deemed descriptive or even generic.  On the small chance it slips by the examiners, then an opposition would be in order.

Not sure I agree with this.  If you're saying that the word is too common to trademark.  There's always the first person to file the trademark for a term.  And they're the ones who get it.  And Bitcoin wasn't even a word 3 years ago.  Let alone trusting the evaluators to be familiar with it even today ... It will be rejected if someone else has trademarked it but not sure it would for any other reason?  

This isn't how trademark law works.  All you need to prove in order to nullify a trademark application is to show that SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE used the term before that person did in commerce, and that they would be "damaged" by their registration.  You could also argue that the term is generic, or a myriad of other defenses.  You don't need to have a "registered" trademark in order to have standing.  Anyone who has printed the word "bitcoin" on a t-shirt has standing for prior use.  And anyone can oppose on grounds that the term is generic.

[Littleshop]

Seems like this is the perfect opportunity for the Bitcoin Foundation to use its resources.

Someone is trying to trademark "Bitcoin" on clothing:

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/97/bitcoin-86097068.html

An opposition won't be necessary.  The application will 99% get rejected, since the term "bitcoin" will be deemed descriptive or even generic.  On the small chance it slips by the examiners, then an opposition would be in order.

Not sure I agree with this.  If you're saying that the word is too common to trademark.  There's always the first person to file the trademark for a term.  And they're the ones who get it.  And Bitcoin wasn't even a word 3 years ago.  Let alone trusting the evaluators to be familiar with it even today ... It will be rejected if someone else has trademarked it but not sure it would for any other reason?  

This isn't how trademark law works.  All you need to prove in order to nullify a trademark application is to show that SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE used the term before that person did.  You could also argue that the term is generic, or a myriad of other defenses.  You don't need to have a "registered" trademark in order to have standing.  Anyone who has printed the word "bitcoin" on a t-shirt has standing for prior use.  And anyone can oppose on grounds that the term is generic.

IANAL but....

Once someone has a trademark they can be a pain in the ass.  A patent works more the way you say then a trademark.  A trademark should not be granted for this, it is invalid, but if it is it is hard to defend against.

[BitcoinBarrel]

Quick! Register a Patent for Air. We'll be rich!

[sobitcoin]

It's a tough call.

Nobody owns bitcoin.

And I successfully registered a trademark akin to:  BaseballTalk recently.

Can't get more generic and "previously used" than that.  It got approved, because of what I was planning to use it for.  Which was unique.

In the event that a trademark was granted, how does that change the process for opposition had in been filed prior?