Flamers force lawyer to drop application for Bitcoin trademark | Hacker News Reader

Flamers force lawyer to drop application for Bitcoin trademark

betabeat.com

22 pointspadrack15 comments

This reminds me of the asshole who tried to trademark Linux back in the day. Jerks like these have always existed.

Trademarks aren't like patents or copyrights, there isn't a strong presumption of validity attached. Even if he should manage to get one he shouldn't be able to much beyond send threatening letters (at least in the US).

Maybe some cheeky bitcoin user could trademark Magellan Capital Advisors in France, Italy, Spain, Japan and China.

This, and the story about modified versions of VLC being used to distribute malware, seem to be timely illustrations of why Open Source projects should file for and protect their names as trademarks.

I like how he equates filing for IP ownership on something that was obviously developed by others with a gainful venture under capitalism.

I think it's fair to call it capitalism--he's obviously capitalizing. What's debatable is how conscionable that is.

He would have done better to go to someone in the Bitcoin community and offer his services. Someone should own the trademark to protect it. Lots of cc and open source stuff has registered trademarks so the name can't be abused.

Capitalism as an economic system means more than just that "people capitalize". It encompasses things like competitive free markets and legal systems to enforce contracts and discourage fraud.

Filing for IP protections on something that is not by any stretch of the imagination your own IP sounds to me like some combination of fraud and perjury.

someone tried to do a similar thing for cyanogenmod. He tried to pass it off a 'protecting' the project in some way.

Uh, would this paper count as "strong compelling evidence"?

http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

To serve as evidence, its date of publication would have to be established with reasonable reliability. For a fee, The Wayback Machine will provide an affidavit confirming that Document X was archived on their servers as of a given date.[1]

[1] http://www.archive.org/legal/faq.php

Alternatively you could just print it out and mail it to yourself with a seal and never open it unless called for.

Poor man's copyright seems flawed [0]. Where's the basis for mailing it with a seal having legal grounds?

[0] https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Poor_man%27s_...

I'm curious if there's any precedence in the courts. But as far as convincing a judge or jury one way or another, it's some evidence that can help you out in a "he said she said" case. Printed out emails are frequently used in civil cases to help convince the judge of one thing or another, and they're quite easily forged but that doesn't stop them from being considered.

Other methods include putting it in public dirs, pastebin, etc. and letting the internet mirror it for free. Encrypt it if you must, torrent an encrypted tarball if you've got name recognition..

No. Trademarks are to protect the use of marks used in commerce. That paper doesn't provide any evidence of the use of the term in commerce.

the problem is he used a Lawyer License form the USA to file a US trademark which he knew at the time contained some false statements as he was fully aware of the prior art of the trademark being claimed..

anyone know what state he was licensed in?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com