Europe, USA, Australia, Korea, Hong Kong, China, Russia, Switzerland, Israel…
It costs and it continues to cost.
We is BV and Trampa.
@Luke: You don’t file a TM because you have too much cash and time. You do that for reasons and with thought. And when you have it, you use it to full fill its purpose. Otherwise it makes no sense. A project like the VESC-Project will get torn apart if you let everyone use the project identity. Total confusion would happen. It is simply not possible and other OS projects do exactly the same. They register the TM and enforce it. There is nothing wrong about that. Tech is tech, code is code and identity is identity. Identity is not shareable and TMs prevent misuse of identity.
OK! But it has nothing to what I have asked. I asked about Benjamin and his knowledge regarding your actions. As I can kind of understand the whole TM hitting Lee like that was not ok. Asking him to do it was ok. He don’t have ESCs in his store yet right so… yeah it was not ok at least.
It was not OK to confuse TM and basically advertise a TM infringing HW while considering to stock it in his linked online shop. Even if he would stock it a month or two later, the video would still be there and the confusion would work in preparation for product placement. And it helps infringing HW manufacturers to get bigger attention, which is also not OK. Spinted needs to redesign the cover first and the website is also full of infringements. They know about it and do nothing about it. At this stage the product Ubox and the Spinted website uses the VESC TM in trade, against the TM policies. And the product is also styled in a confusing way. Colour logos, usage of VESC brand on product etc.
Benjamin and I considered to ignore Lee, but there is a point where it is simply not possible any longer. If you point out the issues and someone continues to take things even further south, what do you do? It is a very clear statement from Lee’s side. Enough is enough and we are not the ones who need to beg for compliance. Benjamin should expect compliance, simply because it is not a big deal to stick to two simple rules when you get so much back from him and his continued efforts:
a) use your own brand in trade
b) respect the GPL
What is so difficult about it? Is that really too demanding?
He doesn’t hold one on the acronym V.E.S.C. for variable electronic speed controller.
Not to mention the acronym VESC falls under “merely descritptive” and not “suggestive” trademark policy in the US and can’t be enforced under trademark law as an acronym.
Just to be clear, BV doesn’t own a trade mark for the phrase “variable electronic speed controller”
annnnnd periods aren’t grammatically required in acronyms
so we should all be allowed to say VESC to mean variable electronic speed controllers then.
No it is not. You can’t sell a tablet and print based on Apple iPad design onto it. Brand on product is a big no no. Also here the two channels are described as VESC A and VESC B. Also artwork is usually copyright protected and graphical elements that you did not design yourself should not be used.
Not a lawyer but it seems this would fall in the category “Nominative use”
Fair Use Defense to Trademark Infringement: Nominative Use
In trademark law, nominative use is one of the most important balances between consumer protection and free expression. Nominative use permits the use of a trademark – even in commercial contexts – if it is the most accurate way to refer to a good or service without misleading consumers as to its source.
, I mean nothing bad by questioning you, i just feel the handling of this situation was all wrong
