Matthew Verkler
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2006
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
This shit is starting to piss me off, which is funny because I don't use Red in my company name and have no plans to do so. Many have posted that this topic is "lame" and we should get back to making images. Well, there is a hell of a lot of business shit that goes into making images unless you are an amateur. So this discussion is important. For example, the Ninjas Formerly Known as Red Ninjas (now 4K Ninjas) had to change their name because it was causing confusion (and therefore violating Red's trademark). If you've ever started a business, you know that there are a lot of costs associated with your company name, brand, image, etc. I saw the 4K Ninja van parked close to the convention center at NAB this year. If they had painted that as "Red Ninjas" earlier, then there would be an expense to repaint it. This issue IS important.
To fellow Red owners or businesses using Red products:
It is clear that Red has a trademark and that it expects it to be respected. Red has been nice and smart enough to state this now, instead of just going after people in court. That's good. Red's business practices regarding their customers are generally above reproach; they are the good guys. So give up the "Red Shooter", "I Shoot Red", "Ultra Red Support Team" kind of names. (yes, these are lame, but you get the point). If you named your company "Sony Shooter", "I Shoot Sony", "Ultra Sony Support Team", it's obvious that there's a trademark infringement that would lead to confusion on the part of the "consumer". If you really have your heart set on such a name and think it might not infringe, contact Red and see what they think. I am sure Redmodz.com, RedConnector.com, etc. have done that. I hope so anyway.
To Red:
Yes, you've trademarked Red. Good. We need you to be successful so we can be successful and your trademark is important for your success. I think we all understand that. But if I want to start a company called "Red Sky Films", for example (I don't know if such a company exists), that doesn't lead anyone to think that somehow Red Digital Cinema Camera Company is involved or is being represented. Red is not in the business of making films, are they? Red Sky obviously implies a sky that is red, not a camera, display device, etc., and as it is Red Sky Films, it is obviously some kind of content creator or owner. Unless such a company somehow used images of the Red One or other Red products in their logo or other company branding materials, there is no confusion or misrepresentation. Trademark law has a long track record, and while there are always surprises, it's fairly easy to figure out.
There's the letter of the law and then there's the spirit of the law. I believe that Red is and will act more on the spirit of the law than the letter, as that is who they are. If Red is suing anyone, it's probably because of a real problem that was not able to be resolved through discussion. That would be a shame if it was with a Red customer. In this thread, Red can come across as a little draconian, which frankly chafes my butt slightly (I'm human and American), but I think they are being that way to be clear and to head off further problems and misunderstandings with their customer base. With the "dynamic" nature of this forum and this community, Red was somewhat burned at NAB with all the rumors, FUD, and other assorted bullshit that was flying around. Everything calmed down, but they have seen the dark side of their fairly democratic business style and development process. I understand their need for clarity.
So, can we all be reasonable? A lot of us, with characteristic enthusiasm about our beloved Red's, have gotten domain names and even company names declaring our passion for Red. It sucks when people have to step back a bit and change things, but we have to and we should give Red the respect they deserve and that their trademark demands. Already there are enough Red One's out there that just having Red in your name will not really give you a competitive advantage. The Red world is starting to mature slightly and it's time to get back to the basics of our businesses.
And Red, I know it's really just semantics, but it would be nice if you could speak to us users in slightly less totalitarian terms. You're right to sue LG; I am sure you will kick their ass and I'm rooting for you all the way. Theirs was a clear and flagrant violation and they must be stopped. And yes, you're right to clear up all these Red domain names and company names that clearly refer to the Red camera. It's confusing and violates your trademark. Clearly. But please don't tell me I can't use the word "red" in my company name under any circumstances, because it just isn't true. I can have the word "camera", "company", and even "digital" in my company name. I can have the word "red" in my company name, if it doesn't violate your trademark as governed by trademark law. If I want to name my company "Red Peril Productions" (again, don't know if there is such a company already), then I will go ahead and do it. And it wouldn't have anything to do with the Red One or any other Red products. Of course in the spirit of the Red community, I would probably run it by Red just to be polite.
Respectfully,
Matthew Verkler
(edited for grammar)
(additional edit) BTW, the free audio board upgrade is awesome! Red's actions do speak the loudest - they are a class act with no current peers.
To fellow Red owners or businesses using Red products:
It is clear that Red has a trademark and that it expects it to be respected. Red has been nice and smart enough to state this now, instead of just going after people in court. That's good. Red's business practices regarding their customers are generally above reproach; they are the good guys. So give up the "Red Shooter", "I Shoot Red", "Ultra Red Support Team" kind of names. (yes, these are lame, but you get the point). If you named your company "Sony Shooter", "I Shoot Sony", "Ultra Sony Support Team", it's obvious that there's a trademark infringement that would lead to confusion on the part of the "consumer". If you really have your heart set on such a name and think it might not infringe, contact Red and see what they think. I am sure Redmodz.com, RedConnector.com, etc. have done that. I hope so anyway.
To Red:
Yes, you've trademarked Red. Good. We need you to be successful so we can be successful and your trademark is important for your success. I think we all understand that. But if I want to start a company called "Red Sky Films", for example (I don't know if such a company exists), that doesn't lead anyone to think that somehow Red Digital Cinema Camera Company is involved or is being represented. Red is not in the business of making films, are they? Red Sky obviously implies a sky that is red, not a camera, display device, etc., and as it is Red Sky Films, it is obviously some kind of content creator or owner. Unless such a company somehow used images of the Red One or other Red products in their logo or other company branding materials, there is no confusion or misrepresentation. Trademark law has a long track record, and while there are always surprises, it's fairly easy to figure out.
There's the letter of the law and then there's the spirit of the law. I believe that Red is and will act more on the spirit of the law than the letter, as that is who they are. If Red is suing anyone, it's probably because of a real problem that was not able to be resolved through discussion. That would be a shame if it was with a Red customer. In this thread, Red can come across as a little draconian, which frankly chafes my butt slightly (I'm human and American), but I think they are being that way to be clear and to head off further problems and misunderstandings with their customer base. With the "dynamic" nature of this forum and this community, Red was somewhat burned at NAB with all the rumors, FUD, and other assorted bullshit that was flying around. Everything calmed down, but they have seen the dark side of their fairly democratic business style and development process. I understand their need for clarity.
So, can we all be reasonable? A lot of us, with characteristic enthusiasm about our beloved Red's, have gotten domain names and even company names declaring our passion for Red. It sucks when people have to step back a bit and change things, but we have to and we should give Red the respect they deserve and that their trademark demands. Already there are enough Red One's out there that just having Red in your name will not really give you a competitive advantage. The Red world is starting to mature slightly and it's time to get back to the basics of our businesses.
And Red, I know it's really just semantics, but it would be nice if you could speak to us users in slightly less totalitarian terms. You're right to sue LG; I am sure you will kick their ass and I'm rooting for you all the way. Theirs was a clear and flagrant violation and they must be stopped. And yes, you're right to clear up all these Red domain names and company names that clearly refer to the Red camera. It's confusing and violates your trademark. Clearly. But please don't tell me I can't use the word "red" in my company name under any circumstances, because it just isn't true. I can have the word "camera", "company", and even "digital" in my company name. I can have the word "red" in my company name, if it doesn't violate your trademark as governed by trademark law. If I want to name my company "Red Peril Productions" (again, don't know if there is such a company already), then I will go ahead and do it. And it wouldn't have anything to do with the Red One or any other Red products. Of course in the spirit of the Red community, I would probably run it by Red just to be polite.
Respectfully,
Matthew Verkler
(edited for grammar)
(additional edit) BTW, the free audio board upgrade is awesome! Red's actions do speak the loudest - they are a class act with no current peers.
