Andreas Schildbach (OP)
|
|
August 25, 2011, 07:22:52 PM |
|
http://esearch.oami.europa.eu/copla/trademark/data/010050466This is a trademark for a logo plus the term "bit coin". The deadline for objections will expire very soon! Note that the applicant can also use the term alone to proceed against someone. It does not need a logo at all to violate against this trademark, if it becomes valid. http://esearch.oami.europa.eu/copla/trademark/data/010103646This is a trademark for the term "bitcoin". Expiry time has not begun yet, because the application is still under examination by the office. But: It was already objected by the owner of the trademark above! Obviously he thinks the term bitcoin is violating his logo + term trademark. If the office agrees, this means that the above trademark can be used to ban all uses of the term Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bitcoin network protocol was designed to be extremely flexible. It can be used to create timed transactions, escrow transactions, multi-signature transactions, etc. The current features of the client only hint at what will be possible in the future.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
dree12
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1076
|
|
August 25, 2011, 07:37:32 PM |
|
Um, no, you can't ban uses of any term in day-to-day use. That's like saying you aren't allowed to say "Microsoft" or "Wal-mart" because those are trademarked. Let them trademark it, it's just them wasting money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymailer
|
|
August 26, 2011, 10:49:22 AM |
|
Just because a company gets a trademark or patent, it doesn't necessarily mean it's worth anything. Anyone who trademarks Bitcoin and tries to prevent 'bitcoincharts.com' or 'spendbitcoins.com' from using it is going to quickly have their trademark made worthless by the courts.
|
|
|
|
FlipPro
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1015
|
|
August 26, 2011, 11:18:18 AM |
|
Just because a company gets a trademark or patent, it doesn't necessarily mean it's worth anything. Anyone who trademarks Bitcoin and tries to prevent 'bitcoincharts.com' or 'spendbitcoins.com' from using it is going to quickly have their trademark made worthless by the courts.
Yes it will be the same situation with Twitter and Tweet. Twitter tried to trademark the keyword tweet even though it was a user created keyword. They tried to take it to court, and lost embarrassingly. Now all the tweet domains have skyrocketed . http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10313566-2.html
|
|
|
|
server
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 892
Merit: 1002
1 BTC =1 BTC
|
|
August 26, 2011, 11:30:25 AM |
|
He should not do all these things under one flag. Claiming 'bitcoin' makes him and his other projects more vunerable.
|
|
|
|
Oldminer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1022
Merit: 1001
|
|
August 26, 2011, 11:32:01 AM |
|
LOL..by the time they get the trademark no-one will be mining it anymore.
|
|
|
|
server
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 892
Merit: 1002
1 BTC =1 BTC
|
|
August 26, 2011, 12:12:12 PM |
|
LOL..by the time they get the trademark no-one will be mining it anymore.
The coins and the exchanges will be around for a long time. Tibanne or anyone else should have created a non profit organisation that protects all bitcoin related things. Or better, we, as a community, should do such a thing. Every bitcoin/wallet user could pay 0.1 bitcoin and with this money we can protect everything there is, names, images, protocol and also file a worldwide patent. But not for profit, just to protect.
|
|
|
|
Anonymailer
|
|
August 26, 2011, 12:16:06 PM |
|
Or better, we, as a community, should do such a thing. Every bitcoin/wallet user could pay 0.1 bitcoin and with this money we can protect everything there is, names, images, protocol and also file a worldwide patent.
Is there really any need though? As long as said names, images and protocol are all released under an open-source or royalty free license what does it matter? At this point I'm pretty sure 'prior art' covers most aspects of BTC (the name, the frequently used logos and the protocol) so we really shouldn't have anything to worry about.
|
|
|
|
server
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 892
Merit: 1002
1 BTC =1 BTC
|
|
August 26, 2011, 01:11:50 PM |
|
Or better, we, as a community, should do such a thing. Every bitcoin/wallet user could pay 0.1 bitcoin and with this money we can protect everything there is, names, images, protocol and also file a worldwide patent.
Is there really any need though? As long as said names, images and protocol are all released under an open-source or royalty free license what does it matter? At this point I'm pretty sure 'prior art' covers most aspects of BTC (the name, the frequently used logos and the protocol) so we really shouldn't have anything to worry about. I don't like the idea that one company is the owner of the name 'bitcoin'. (don't know what possible future implications can be.) I would like to see that Bitcoin is the owner of the brand Bitcoin and everything that relates. I would like to see that every user of a bitcoin-wallet is a (stock)owner of Bitcoin "the company". We have everything available to make this happen, with GLBSE we could all be shareholder of the non profit Bitcoin organisation. Why should we wait until a 'for profit' individual/company like Tibanne gets this and maybe sells it all to G or MS or worse...
|
|
|
|
Coinbuck @ BTCLot
|
|
August 26, 2011, 01:34:44 PM |
|
Very interesting.
I wonder why MTGox is interested in trademark bitcoin in europe.
|
|
|
|
|