If Bitcoin Community Doesn’t Take Action, Trademark Lawyer Could “Box Them In” | Hacker News Reader

If Bitcoin Community Doesn’t Take Action, Trademark Lawyer Could “Box Them In”

betabeat.com

22 pointscitadrianne16 comments

Rename "Bitcoins" to "Credits." The term "Credit" would be awfully difficult to trademark, and I think we can all agree that having a universal, decentralized currency called "Credits" would be _awesome_.

I think that would be a good move, as "bitcoin" isn't really a good name. 1) it's not about coins at all and 2) I wouldn't be sad for getting rid of the nerdy "bit". Yes, it's a cryptocurrency, but that's just the underlying system. IMO the focus is on building a decentralized, global currency.

The problem with "credits" would be that it's very hard to Google, it's not really a distinctive name. It does sound nicely futuristic, though.

I bet Facebook has some kind of trademark on "Credits"

No. That would be Imperial Credits.

" Mr. Pascazi does not really understand trademark law, it appears. While he is correct that many civil law countries have a first-to-file process, that does not mean they have no ability to challenge the issuance of the mark.

A trademark must be a source identifier. In other words, Mr. Pascazi's 'client' must be recognized as the source of a product by consumers if the mark Bitcoin is used.

As for enforcing international marks in the U.S., this is not as easily done as Mr. Pascazi would hope. Especially if he is able to obtain a registration abroad on such shaky grounds. It could still be subject to the same cancellation process as a U.S. mark.

The question is whether Mr. Pascazi will truly try and enforce a foreign mark on foreign soil. Paying international lawyers is not cheap.

And will he continue to maintain the mark and defend it against attacks?

Mr. Pascazi's client is over-reaching. I recommend Mr. Pascazi or his lawyer consult real trademark attorneys about this. They might receive more thorough advice. "

From: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110708/00564015004/lawyer...

Someone's in for a world of (cyber) hurt.

I want to kiss the feet of scumbags like Pascazi, because vile plans like this one are exactly the sort of antagonist the world is going to have to experience before it comes to a sane relationship with the concept of intellectual property.

I agree with you, but this won't be the event that does that. This situation is going to have to happen to something that "mainstream" people actually care about.

I'm not making a value judgement about bitcoin here one way or the other, just saying that people involved in bitcoins are generally already aware of these IP issues so this specific event is unlikely to spread the message much.

Seems that groups like Anonymous would tend to be pro-BTC... Guess we'll find out.

How do they suppose someone could "step up"?

via a non-profit like OSI -- or just one person who would agree to license the name to anyone who asked for legit BTC business

In every single jurisdiction where the trademark standard is first-to-file, though? It seems like a lot to ask.

But wouldn't that lawyer be first now? How could some other person get in front of him in the application line?

I have heard some people talking about an assassination market with bitcoins being used for payment. If some lawyer threatened bitcoin it wouldn't be surprising to see his name pop up on such a site.

The bitcoin speculators I have seen are anti-government or anarchist types that hoard guns, gold and bitcoins.

I've heard that you can buy plutonium with BitCoin.

Nope, but you can use credit cards: http://www.downloadpipe.com/purchase/Plutonium-buy109909.htm...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com