Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Wednesday January 16 2019, @02:41AM   Printer-friendly
from the The-Chosen-Ones dept.

From Engadget:

Netflix's choose-your-own-adventure style film Black Mirror: Bandersnatch is the subject of a new lawsuit, brought against the streaming giant by Chooseco LLC The company is known for publishing the "Choose Your Own Adventure" book series popular in the 1980s and 90s, and it's claiming Netflix infringed upon its trademarks, Variety reports. Netflix tried to obtain a license for Chooseco's trademark in the past, according to Chooseco, but never reached a deal with the publisher.

In its complaint, Chooseco specifically points to a scene in Bandersnatch where a character makes a reference to a "Choose Your Own Adventure" book -- and that appears to be Chooseco's main infringement charge against Netflix. It also says Netflix is "causing confusion, tarnishing, denigrating and diluting the distinct quality of the 'Choose Your Own Adventure' trademark," and that Bandersnatch's "dark and violent themes" reflect poorly on its brand.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by FatPhil on Wednesday January 16 2019, @08:31AM (5 children)

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Wednesday January 16 2019, @08:31AM (#787292) Homepage
    One possibility not yet mentioned (there are 4 comments and one obviously MikeeeUSA spam as I write this), is that a "trademark" which is just the *simplest* natural language description of a property of the product, service, or brand, using only terms that would naturally be associated with *all* such things, should never be awarded as a trademark in the first place. That's not a trademark, that's a description - stop trying to prevent me from describing your thing. So P&G should be able to trademark "Head and Shoulders" for a shampoo, clever branding that gives you an association to tell you what's properties this product has, but not "Anti-dandruff Shampoo", which is just a description.

    I would proffer that "choose your own adventure" is an exemplar for that situation. As is "Windows". Genericised trademarks not so, the order of time is important, and kleenex/sharpie/xerox/etc. did get there first, and they weren't the simplest natural language description for the thing before they became genericised, even if they are now.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=2, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Wednesday January 16 2019, @11:56AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 16 2019, @11:56AM (#787345) Journal

    That's not a trademark, that's a description...

    Heh! Subway got away with it - they made a trademark [upi.com] from their descriptive (but falling short [huffingtonpost.com.au]) names of their products.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 2) by mobydisk on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:19PM (3 children)

    by mobydisk (5472) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:19PM (#787394)

    It never occurred to me how Microsoft could try to abuse that trademark. As evil as Microsoft has been, I've never heard of them trying to sue someone for using the term "windows" to describe the UI concept, or the portals installed on the sides of my house and car. That would be hilarious actually.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Booga1 on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:03PM (2 children)

      by Booga1 (6333) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:03PM (#787441)

      Behold: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._Lindows.com,_Inc. [wikipedia.org]

      Microsoft v. Lindows.com, Inc. was a court case brought by Microsoft against Lindows, Inc in December 2001, claiming that the name "Lindows" was a violation of its trademark "Windows."

      After two and a half years of court battles, Microsoft paid US$20 million for the Lindows trademark, and Lindows Inc. became Linspire Inc.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by Booga1 on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:09PM (1 child)

        by Booga1 (6333) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:09PM (#787445)

        Though, in retrospect that was over the name of the OS, not the actual UI concept.
        The lawsuit to try to lock down the GUI was by Apple against Microsoft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corp. [wikipedia.org]

        • (Score: 2) by mobydisk on Friday January 18 2019, @05:43PM

          by mobydisk (5472) on Friday January 18 2019, @05:43PM (#788315)

          I was going to point out the Lindows OS name thing. Thanks for the clarification.