Commodore Smartphone Hits Trademark Opposition 46
damnbunni writes: As reported on amiga-news.de, it appears that Massimo Canigiani didn't license the Commodore trademarks before announcing that Commodore PET Smartphone. The company that actually owns the mark, Commodore Holdings, is not amused. It's not like it would have been hard to determine who owns it and try to license. The C= Holdings trademark is registered with the same EU agency 'CBM Limited' applied for a new mark. I can't see much of an excuse here. The company holding Commodore's trademarks is literally Commodore Holdings. They can't even say "We had NO IDEA who to contact!"
use similar accessories? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Still my favorite port of Moon Patrol.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who would name a phone that? (Score:1)
Re: Who would name a phone that? (Score:2)
Pff none match my TRS-800 now with 32GB of ram.
Re: Who would name a phone that? (Score:4, Funny)
Having once bought 16K of RAM for a TRS-80 color computer ... that cost you, what, eleventy-six trillion dollars?
Re: (Score:3)
And with the speed of RAM back then, you would have been almost halfway to using all of that 32GB by now.
Re: (Score:2)
My first computer was ENIAC. I'm hoping they make an ENIAC phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Pfffft. That's not even close to old-skool. *I'm* waiting for a phone based on this [wikipedia.org].
For all my Commodore questions... (Score:1)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That was good.
Who owns it? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a page where I put up a bunch of info about my experiments and memories of my Commodore systems. In the years that page has existed, the ownership of the C= logo/name/etc changed hands FIVE TIMES! Just now, I Googled it, and got this page:
http://www.commodorecorp.com/ [commodorecorp.com]
It hasn't been updated since 2013.
My attempt at a disclaimer is at the bottom of this page:
http://webcache.googleusercont... [googleusercontent.com]
(Google cached, to prevent Slashdotting my Host's server.)
Re: (Score:2)
[quote]It hasn't been updated since 2013.[/quote]
It also looks like exactly 1 URL at that domain actually returns content.
Re: (Score:2)
I noticed that, too... and yet, that company is suing someone for using a name they haven't bothered to do anything with since 2013?
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't defend a trademark, you lose it. Actually using the trademark isn't a requirement.
It really doesn't matter if they're not actively using it. You can't just decide that it's yours now and release something with it.
And it seems like they should have known from the start they have no legal way to just suddenly decide it was theirs for the taking.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a page where I put up a bunch of info about my experiments and memories of my Commodore systems. In the years that page has existed, the ownership of the C= logo/name/etc changed hands FIVE TIMES!
It's not just that, it's that- as far as I can tell- the rights to Commodore's various products and brands have not only been split up, but also sublicensed over the years to the point of being a confusing mess.
The company (*) that made the "Commodore 64x" around four years ago- you remember, the PC in a case that at least *looked* like a C64- also released the "Amiga 1000", "2000" and "3000" [pixelperfectgaming.com]. These had sod all to do with the original Amigas of those names. In fact they weren't even computers in their own
Odd ... (Score:2)
I'm sure when the article was posted originally a bunch of people said "how the hell do they propose to do that since they don't own it".
Is this just a case of someone deciding they'd simply appropriate someone's trademark and release a product around it?
From the sounds of it, this was legally DOA before it was announced.
Something about this sounds really sketchy to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Brings about an interesting point, can you own a trademark without a product or service. So for something like $300 a word can you buy out the English language http://www.oxforddictionaries.... [oxforddictionaries.com], 7000 commonly used words only $2.1 million dollars what a bargain. Psychopathic capitalism, is it not a wonder (they did it on the internet via domain names so why not spread it out into to the rest of the world).
Re: (Score:2)
can you own a trademark without a product or service
Yes, you can.
So for something like $300 a word can you buy out the English language
No, because English words are not specific enough to be trademarks. Trademarks are limited to a particular market segment... so while "Apple" is a unique name for a computer brand, it's not a unique name for a brand of fruit.
Even within the market, a trademark is invalid if it's not unique enough. Typically, the judgement is based on whether a reasonable person would know exactly what product is being referred to when the trademark is used. This boils down to the oft-quoted rule that trademarks
bollocks (Score:2)
for someone 'easy to contact' they sure have been absent from the commodore scene, absent from the fans, absent from the planet earth when this phone was announced.
Commodore should be public by now, it's old hat tech. And thanks to AROS and WinUAE it's already supplanted in the free world, and honestly done much better.
Re: (Score:2)
its only their responsibility to protect their property, nothing else, and they did
so get the fuck over yourself
Re: (Score:2)
Or here is a crazy idea, MAKE SOMETHING NEW.
Re: (Score:2)
Like , what about a modern floppy? Block-writeable media that you can give away. Enough with that internet shit or these flaky USB thumb drives that cost too much, are personal and sometimes require to kneel down behind the PC to plug them in.
I would like a 1GB floppy that costs 1 euro and lasts 15 years, with perhaps the form factor of the 3" Amstrad ones (unbreakable, the drive belt broke instead)
I want some friends and I to exchange music, pictures, documents and so on. Minidisc would have been nice had
Re: (Score:3)
And micro-SD go in more places than regular SD, but the latter is more easy to hold.
This was senseless ranting ; every computer or device can have their needs satisfied in one way or another, so any new best thing wouldn't get hold on many computers or devices. Even generalizing an existing tech to every computer or devices doesn't get done. SD and full size USB are really close but it's uncommon to have them both - except if you constantly run into recent laptops, then it may be very common.
My other rant w
Re: (Score:2)
commadore didnt even do that when they existed, 99% of what they produced was bought with the companies that made it like MOS and Amiga
Re: (Score:2)
Commodore holdings or the Holden commodore
It's the Holden Commodore HSV SmartPhone
Slightly unrelated (Score:3)
Of course it was stupid to use trademarked names and symbols without caring about the trademark holders.
On the other hand, selling trademarks without the actual products is a scam in itself. Since the 90s, a whole bunch of domestic TV makers went belly up. And without exempt, the trademarks were bought up by asian scammers that now slap these trademarks on cheap chinese TVs tricking elderly people (like my late uncle) into buying them at inflated prices as they thing they're buying some local quality products.