Reminder: Mt Gox owns the Bitcoin trademark

[Armis]

As a practical problem, you can image their assets/free cash being tied up in litigation or in compensating customers.

If they are reducing their office footprint, I can't imagine them expending resources to defend a trademark a financial priority.

They would have to retain a US lawyer who would no doubt want their fee up front.

The are not apt to defend it based on infringment but would likely defend against any claim of ownership, and I suspect that matter would get folded into some larger action (bankruptcy, receivership, etc).

 

[1714801403]

1714801403

[Lauda]

Bitcoin seems more and more dead 

Maybe it's time for another and more matured crypto currency to enter the stage.

I have no idea which one, but it appears that the Bitcoin is going to experience strong headwind in the future.

Because a 20x (+) price increase YoY means that it is dying.

[efarah2549]

Not good:
Maybe we should be nice to them.

No, we definitely should not.

drown in tears mark karpeles

[Armis]

Bitcoin seems more and more dead 

Maybe it's time for another and more matured crypto currency to enter the stage.

I have no idea which one, but it appears that the Bitcoin is going to experience strong headwind in the future.

Because a 20x (+) price increase YoY means that it is dying.

essentially nothing happened from year 1 to year 3, then suddenly in year 4 it blossoms in a magnificent way going from double to triple digits, to quad-D,  but that was so 2013, it's now 2014 when btc is seen negotiating a slalom-like trip from a summit of $1200 down to $500 on one leg and $91 on another -- a bifurcated disappointment. 

don't try to spin it, the facts are already dizzy 

[Tirapon]

essentially nothing happened from year 1 to year 3

What about the run up to $32  

[molecular]

some german asshole was faster than gox, though:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113520.0

dude even whipped up a nice logo to register (from the application):



however, it turns out this is irrelevant at least regarding European trademark regulations according to this post by bitcoin.de: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113520.msg1367553#msg1367553

[ISAWHIM]

Funny, there is a law with trademark registration...

If it has been in the "public domain" for more than a year, it can not be trademarked. That trademark is completely null and void. Anyone can prove it was out for over a year, prior to registration. (Somewhere in the application, you had to agree that "this is an original trademark, outside the use of public domain".)

Also, "if the trademark applied for is your own creation"... Which it is not, and the creators have not "given permission to use", so again, that makes the trademark null and void. (Somewhere in the filed application they had to claim that they had rights to use, or were the original creators.)

With those two primary failures, Gox could not actually win any lawsuits with those blatant lies, which are apparently signed and dated lies, on record. (Might even be a form of trademark violation in itself. Applying for property rights with fraudulent information.)

That is why you can not trademark a drawing of a "heart", or the word "heart". That is also why you can't patent a "spoon", or copyright "a bible". (You can get design patents, or translation patents, but those are useless.)

Well, you can apply for a patent on something like a spoon, and you might get it, if the office workers were lazy that day. However, it would not actually hold-up in court, if one person simply proves that it was an invalid patent. (Like, by showing the judge a spoon in a photograph from the 1920's, if the patent was filed in 2010. Or, by showing the code and program with the logo and name "bitcoin", prior to a year before the patent was applied for. Or if they claimed proof of ownership, by getting rights from the creator... all they need to do is provide the creator, to confirm that he gave them the rights. Which is impossible, because he did not, and even if he did, it had been in public domain, with open-source rights, for more than a year prior to the application date.)

[Skinnkavaj]

This is good, that Mark protects the trademark.

[aminorex]

each cryptocurrency will find their niche over time

a niche in the circular file, most of them

[aminorex]

This is good, that Mark protects the trademark.

And he has a really cool sword.

[tokeweed]

there could be a conspiracy here. there are a group of people who want bitcoin to stay and remain as something to be fooled around with for hobbyists.

it's like them saying 'ok newbs, step aside, it's time for the pros to come in', then they get their own crypto-currency out there.

[Lauda]

This is good, that Mark protects the trademark.

Just like he is protecting Bitcoin?

[coins101]

Trademarks are enforced territory by territory.

If everyone infringes on the trademark around the world, whoever buys the trademark would be in court for years to come. They would go bankrupt themselves.

[Unacceptable]

essentially nothing happened from year 1 to year 3

What about the run up to $32  

Yeah!!  & Gox screwed that up too by being hacked,then again in July 2013 with the run up to $150 by letting their trading platform lag for days..........& GOXXED AGAIN IN 2014!!!!

Let Gox die!!!!!!!!!!  

[gollum]

Here is another reason why the bitcoin community should try to save MtGox;

Tibanne owns the bitcoin trademark, not MtGox.
But Tibanne owns MtGox (88% of shares), and Tibanne is 100% owned by Mark Karpeles.

What happens if the court decides that Mark Karpeles has acted irresponsible as a CEO, and takes all of his assets to cover the bankrupcy and pay debtors?
That means they liquidiate the assets of Tibanne and sell the trademark bitcoin to the highest bidder on the market.
The new owner could start to claim license fees from all bitcoin related products and services.

On the other hand bitcoin is a generic trademark which means the trademark is invalid, you can't trademark something that is a common name for a product.
So anyone can actually complain on the trademark office of EU and ask them to cancel the trademark bitcoin.

USPTO refused to register the trademark blockchain for the same reason:

As seen from the previously attached evidence as well as the attached evidence, the term BLOCKCHAIN refers to a transaction database openly shared among peers regarding cryptocurrency.  The term BLOCKCHAIN identifies the public record of the transactions of the decentralized electronic currency called Bitcoins in chronological order.  When customers would view the term BLOCKCHAIN in relation to the stated “Financial services, namely, providing a virtual currency for use by members of an on-line community via a global computer network”, they would immediately know it was referring to the openly shared transaction database used to keep track of the virtually currency.  The term BLOCKCHAIN is not a source identifier for a particular entity; rather as evidenced from the attached, the term BLOCKCHAIN, along with terms such as BITCOINS, MINING, WALLET, etc. are in the public realm to be used by all who participate in cryptocurrency.  It is not a term that can be trademarked by one entity.

The applicant confirms “BLOCKCHAIN” ‘is now a part of cryptocurrency nomenclature’. However applicant  states ‘[w]hile the word has meaning – it is not a descriptive word.’  The examining attorney must respectfully disagree.  The term BLOCKCHAIN when used in relation to the stated financial services would be perceived by the members of the on-line community as merely identifying the public record of financial transactions.  The term would not be viewed as an identifier of source.  Thus the refusal to register the mark pursuant to Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act is repeated and made final.

http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn86015649&docId=OOA20131216142307#docIndex=0&page=1

[feardox]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/28/us-bitcoin-mtgox-bankruptcy-idUSBREA1R0FX20140228

look up guys.. time to buy and mine some more bitcoins!! We are going to trend up soon.

News = fake drama manipulated for fear. I'm expecting btc to be at 2500-3000 dollars by the end of october/november 2014

[UEC]

Funny, there is a law with trademark registration...

If it has been in the "public domain" for more than a year, it can not be trademarked. That trademark is completely null and void. Anyone can prove it was out for over a year, prior to registration. (Somewhere in the application, you had to agree that "this is an original trademark, outside the use of public domain".)

There we have it.

Thanks for that!

[gollum]

Funny, there is a law with trademark registration...

If it has been in the "public domain" for more than a year, it can not be trademarked. That trademark is completely null and void. Anyone can prove it was out for over a year, prior to registration. (Somewhere in the application, you had to agree that "this is an original trademark, outside the use of public domain".)

There we have it.

Thanks for that!

You can lose a trademark even if it wasn't in the public domain from the beginning, but it becomes a common word for a product:
App store, Aspirin, Escalator, Heroin, Thermos...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks

[RichG]

Under the Crytocurrency Consitution, Crypto trademarks cannot be claimed by any individual or entity.

I know of the Cryptocurrency King, the cryptocurrency universe, and the cryptocurrency economy but I never heard of the Cryptocurrency Constitution?

I made it about a year ago, just search it, haven't taken the draft copy off, but no one suggested changes so its the final copy now

have got a few digital copy's plus a framed one on the wall like it came out of an old Spanish galleon

on top of this I'm planning the Cryptocurrency Banking act though that's going to be some piece of work and will take a few months yet

I don't recognize your constitution!

[Razick]

Not good:
Maybe we should be nice to them.

Hell no!