Hasta La Gadget!

While many can tell the difference between Sky TV services and Microsoft’s SkyDrive cloud storage, that’s not necessarily true for everyone. A British court certainly thinks there’s room for confusion: it has ruled that SkyDrive infringes BSkyB’s trademarks on the Sky name in both the UK and the European Union. The presiding judge didn’t believe that Microsoft’s use of the “sky” prefix was absolutely necessary, and she showed evidence that at least some of the general public didn’t understand which company made what. Microsoft says it plans to appeal the verdict, although there’s no guarantee that it will have to relabel SkyDrive if the appeal falls through. Some past trademark lawsuits have led to fines instead of name changes, and we suspect Microsoft would rather pay out than lose brand recognition across a whole continent.

Filed under: Home Entertainment, Storage, Internet, HD, Microsoft

Comments

Via: TechCrunch

Source: BAILII

Several years ago a man named Tim Langdell was able to successfully win trademarks on several rather generic terms. The terms trademarked by Langdell included “edge,” “cutting edge,” “the edge,” and “gamer’s edge.” After winning those trademarks, the man said about suing any video game company that used any of those words in the title of their video games.

Reports indicate that he was successful in getting several developers to pay money to license the use of those terms in their games. Eventually Langdell set his sights on a bigger fish in the form of the EA and sued them for trademark infringement over the popular game Mirror’s Edge. This is where things went south for Langdell.

One thing EA had that most of the other developers that were forced to pay licensing fees to use those generic trademarked terms lacked was money and a legal team at their disposal. The fight ensued in court and in 2010, United States District Court Judge sided with EA against Langdell. After all these years the US Patent and Trademark Office has finally got around to canceling those trademarks.

The trademarks in question are filed under registration numbers 2219837, 2251584, 3105816, 3381826, and 3559342. Now that the trademarks are being canceled, game developers will be able to use those words in video game titles without fearing a suit from a patent troll. There is no indication at this time if any of the companies that paid licensing fees to avoid court will get their money back.

[via Games Industry]

USPTO shreds Edge trademarks and kills a troll is written by Shane McGlaun & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

This week the folks at the United States Patent and Trademark Office have denied Apple’s first application for trademarking the term “iPad mini“. As it’s noted in the letter that was originally sent out back near the end of January, made public this week, the USPTO has re-stated that the “i” as well as the “Pad” bits of the application are fine, while the “mini” bit of the show needs to be a bit more descriptive. And the April Fools Jokes commence.

One of the more amazing takes on this situation comes from AppAdvice where they’ve falsified a couple of quotes from Apple, saying they’ll be moving forward with the name “iNewton” instead of iPad mini from this point forward. Sound like a reasonable action to you? This situation is odd for more than its subsequent jokes, mind you – while generally Apple has been granted trademarks such as these without fail here in the USA.

As noted by Patently Apple, the original submission of this patent application and the time between then and now, when the documents have been made public, is a real oddity. Also odd is the time between the denial, made on March 27th, and the time it was made public – several days later. That said, it’s certainly not the end of the iPad mini as we know it – Apple has the opportunity to re-submit its application to the USPTO without penalty.

Without a successful application by Apple to the USPTO, they’ll continue to only have a trademark on the name “iPad.” As the USPTO notes, the letter “i” before the name does successfully indicate that Apple is showing the device to work with the internet in their own unique way, much like the iPhone. Their current denial comes in the form of the “mini” which they say only says that the original iPad is being shown in a smaller size – effectively suggesting that Apple’s name isn’t something they can claim as their own naming convention.

No Joke: Apple must resubmit “iPad mini” trademark application is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

Livescribe v BSkyB was one of the stranger trademark battles we’ve seen recently, because the two companies operate in such different spheres — one makes smartpens, the other runs TV and internet services. Nevertheless, the English High Court has now ruled in favor of BSkyB, forcing Livescribe to recall all stock bearing the offending three-letter word and to re-baptize its “Sky wifi smartpen” simply as the “wifi smartpen”. Suddenly, the packaging left over from our review of the device just feels so naughty.

Filed under: Peripherals, Internet, HD

Comments

Apple will appeal its lost rights to the “iphone” trademark in Brazil, it’s been confirmed, though local firm Gradiente must first prove it has used the term else see its fight with the Cupertino firm scuppered. The Brazilian copyright regulator ruled in favor of Gradiente Eletronica SA earlier this week, after the company pointed out it had filed a request to use the all-lowercase “iphone” name back in 2000; however, approval was only given in 2008, and, Reuters reports, Gradiente must now demonstrate it made use of the name within five years of that point.

The handset likely to be wheeled out to prove that usage is the iphone Neo One, first shown off in mid-December 2012. Running Android on generally humble specifications, and bearing no physical similarities – bar the touchscreen-centric design – to the appearance of Apple’s iPhone, the device retails in Brazil for around $304 unlocked and SIM-free.

There’s every reason to believe that Gradiente’s launch of the iphone Neo One was a tactical one. The company, in order to keep control of the trademark, must demonstrate that it has used it on a product sometime between January 2008 – when it was granted use of the term – and January 2013, a period of five years. Without that, it would be deemed to have not developed the brand appropriately, and thus lose its claim to it.

Apple has apparently requested that this week’s decision be reviewed, though if Gradiente doesn’t sue over the variants of iPhone Apple offers in the country, the two product ranges can co-exist. That’s unlikely to be Gradiente’s – or, in fact, IGB Electronica SA, the company formed after Gradiente was restructured – intention, however, with the firm likely to be angling for an out-of-court settlement instead.

That’s not without precedent. Apple paid Chinese firm Proview $60m back in July 2012, after attempts to acquire the iPad trademark in the country were mired in controversy. Although Apple insisted that a prior agreement gave it rights to the name, Proview argued differently, and a settlement proved the easiest way to clear the headache.

Apple will appeal iPhone Brazil trademark loss is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.