Trampa Trademark & VESC Tool Discussions (serious)

[Trampa]

The ZESC is fine as far as I know, but distributing it together with altered software, using the VESC-Brand is not OK. The problems are on the hand.

[Luke]

@Trampa

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

That’s my whole point Benjamin… Have it occurred to you that there’s so much resistance because of you? People just don’t trust you and don’t want to believe in what you say. If VESC is Benjamins property what is a official deal between you that you are able to brand your Trampa products?
People see you as a guy from company that is licensing VESC.
And regarding Lee look:

First and third is fucking MBoards and Benjamin is fifth. It’s clear that there’s something more behind you actions against Lee as those other videos are just fine. Those half truths are the reason why people don’t trust you and why the don’t respect you as they would respect Benjamin. We got a history with those (ESCape, stewii…)
So again it’s super weird for me that Vedder is totally out of every single conversation when one his statement would do the job.

[Bavioze]

You are just doing this bc it makes easy work of the competing companies, why would you not ban literally every other maytech and flipsky esc bc it says based on vesc.

You banned the small guy that shat on your “big boy” controller… How convenient.

[ducktaperules]

@Trampa

They just fail to create brand.

@Trampa

use your own brand in trade

@Trampa

You can not use someone else’s identity as your own identity.

@Trampa

Focbox and Stormcore are two good example how you should handle branding and marketing. Both made use of the code, but both created their own identity / brand.

@Trampa

It’s not even in your favour to use someone else’s identity.

@Trampa

How should Benjamin Vedder protect himself from bad reputation if he is not granted identity? V = Vedder

@Trampa

identity is identity.

I find it interesting that a company that is so pro brand-identity chose to heavily piggyback on the work of someone else’s OS project rather than developing a Trampa brand range of products.

Im sure if you were offering T-ESC right now and using your own name people might be more inclined to agree with you on these points.

@Trampa

He was even born as Vedder. Others TRAMPA just tired to make use of that

[Lee_Wright]

@Lee_Wright

And what about all the other videos which also present devices with infringing trademarks on the case? Will you also apply to have those videos removed from YouTube?

@Trampa answer the question

[Trampa]

I would differentiate between:

A) use in trade
B) non trade use
C) private, non private
D) with intention to infringe
E) non intentionally

Some guys just make videos but do not trade. Like an instruction video for example.
You potentially trade the stuff you make videos about, so you have a high responsibility to follow the TM policies and also fair trade rules etc.

[Lee_Wright]

And here we have the crux of the matter - it’s because of Apex. Conveniently a company that’s operating in your space.

Thank you, that’s all I needed to know.

[Trampa]

@ducktaperules

piggyback on the work of someone else’s OS project

Sorry, we invest heavily into R&D and dev support and do not piggyback.

[ducktaperules]

I at no point said you were not a valued contributor to the OS project, but you also choose to adopt someones existing brand and name rather than build your own.

[Skunk]

@Trampa

potentially

That word is very important.

[Luke]

So those MBoards videos are not use in trade?

[Trampa]

We care about what comes to our eyes and how we judge the situation.

[ProfoundMagician]

@Trampa

We care about what comes to our eyes and how we judge the situation.

That doesn’t sound very legally correct.

[Trampa]

The world is big and even big brands can’t have theirs eyes in every corner of this planet.

[ProfoundMagician]

That wasn’t what I was talking about.
I was talking about the second statement.

[approachinglogic]

Pretty sure you’re tiptoeing along the lines the competition and markets authority (UK) care about…its getting pretty close to abusing your market dominance by targeting smaller potential competitors over things that are… Legally questionable. Not something I am an expert on, but I have come across this at work.

[Trampa]

A registered TM is legally not questionable. And a TM complaint at Youtube is also not questionable.

[approachinglogic]

No you’re right, but the way you’re enforcing it absolutely is and that is specifically what abusing market dominance speaks to.

Of course, this is not something I imagine would make its way to the CMA yet.

My point being that if one wanted to, it would be legally possible to show a case of targeting in this instance, which is then anti competitive.

[A13XR3]

@Luke

It’s clear that there’s something more behind you actions against Lee as those other videos are just fine. Those half truths are the reason why people don’t trust you

@Lee_Wright

it’s because of Apex. Conveniently a company that’s operating in your space

Yeah, this is plainly clear for everyone to see. The only thing frank is doing here is bullying another company with which he has to compete. Rather anti innovation of you frank. Competition is what is pushing you to get that BMS integration in to the vesc and out to market so quickly now isn’t it???

@ducktaperules

Im sure if you were offering T-ESC right now and using your own name people might be more inclined to agree with you on these points.

This. This is key. @Trampa How about, instead of pulling a velcro, which by all accounts clearly does not work, as your own site demonstrates… You lead by example and rename your Trampa VESC something independent of “vesc” thus utterly and completely eliminating the confusion for customers as to what vesc is vs what a trampa speed controller is. And continuing the fair promotion of an open source project you repeatedly try and make as difficult to use as possible.

@Trampa

And a TM complaint at Youtube is also not questionable.

Ahahaha that’s where you are very incorrect. Youtube has no obligation to enforce legal actions. They, in fact, do the exact opposite and only have a copyright claim system because it prevents excessive legal action they would have to process and enforce once directed to do so by the gov’t entity.

Your copyright strike is in no way a legal enforcement as youtube is in no way a governing body. They can only be compelled to do so by one. If Lee has any slight defense for the claim, which he does, youtube is very likely to remove your claim and instruct you that they will not take any further action without legal filings on your part.

[bollen]

@A13XR3

rename your Trampa VESC something independent of “vesc” thus utterly and completely eliminating the confusion for customers as to what vesc is vs what a trampa speed controller is

This is what should have happened in the first place before the trademark was put in place.