Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Trademark clarification...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trust me... if they had filed 1st there would be no lawsuit.

Jim
 
I knew nothing about the "behind-the-scenes", but when I first saw the Scarlet TV ads by LG coming out of nowhere and dealing with IMAGE QUALITY, I thought that's too close to a name already plastered all over the internet in long lines of folks in anticipation of the 'mysterious camera' (substitute the mysterious LG woman action-hero!) for months, if not a year before hand.... That's got to help your case, Mr. Jannard. Your openess leaves a 'papertrail' that's easy to follow. Combined with the info you're stating about LG's contacting you, etc., if I was a lawyer, I'd take your case for free, (until we reach a settlement, of course. And I'll slave for an EPIC!;>)
 
Joseph Hutson said:
So there HAS been a lawsuit filed on LG? Not surprised, except surprised that LG pursued the name Scarlet knowing full well that you had it first.
Click to expand...

Companies do this all the time. Apple tried to say with a straight face that their iPhone would not be confused with an already registered trademark for iPhone in Canada, which was owned by a company that provided VOIP.

Their argument didn't fly and they made "arrangements" with the Canadian trademark owner.

I'm sure that LG has enough lawyers to at least make a case that their Scarlet TV will not be confused with Red's Scarlet camera. (I'm not saying they'll be correct)

This kind of law is not black and white--it's what you can convince a court into believing.
 
LawrenceDinkins said:
LG is a large company. If Jim pick a fight with LG, it might make a 4K or 8K camera and sell it for $5K and put RED out of business.
LG has the technology and know-how and finances and production facilities to do this. RED might be able to compete with Sony on price, but, RED cannot compete with LG on price or quality. I hope RED picking a fight with LG might not end up as Georgia which picked fight with Russia.
Just a thought.
Click to expand...

I would never buy an LG product - never saw them as quality for some reason.
So if they came out with a RED camera, wouldnt even think twice about it.

Peace

dAlen
 
LawrenceDinkins said:
LG is a large company. If Jim pick a fight with LG, it might make a 4K or 8K camera and sell it for $5K and put RED out of business.
LG has the technology and know-how and finances and production facilities to do this. RED might be able to compete with Sony on price, but, RED cannot compete with LG on price or quality. I hope RED picking a fight with LG might not end up as Georgia which picked fight with Russia.
Just a thought.
Click to expand...

LG doesn't have the people, they are behind already. They are way behind on the learning curve. RED has first mover advantage. Making digital cinema cameras is not one of LG's core competencies. If anything trying to compete with RED would hurt LG more than RED. Also, I doubt they could undercut the RED; have you seen the price of some of RED One's true competitors? The red one is very inexpensive as these cameras go.
 
Apparently, engadget doesn't believe Soccermoms will buy a "pro-grade camera".

"we think RED's going to have a tough time selling a judge on the likelihood of confusion between a consumer-oriented HDTV and a decidedly pro-grade camera"
 
Hi Guys,

Dunno if this helps or throws a monkey wrench in.. but I think I've read elsewhere that you cannot trademark a name with a common word. Such as say.. "Orange Crush" is original, but just calling it "Orange" is not. There have been other "Red"'s used.. like "Big Red", or "Red Vines".. etc. As in the case of Apple from Apple, Inc. ..? Maybe that's where Red has some common ground?

~Sarah

Here's some text I found on the web..

What can be trademarked?

Trademark registration can be granted on distinctive names, logos and slogans. Marks may be inherently distinctive because they are original and unique, or may become a strong mark over time or as a result of a marketing campaign. Inherently distinctive marks may be:

* suggestive or evocative marks - made-up words that suggest or evoke qualities of the product or service (Slim-Fast, Expedia)
* coined or fanciful marks - arbitrary made-up words (Exxon, Kleenex, Viagra)
* arbitrary marks - words that are surprising or unexpected in the context of their use (Sprite soft drink, Amazon online bookstore)
* unique logos or symbols - distinctive typography or artwork (McDonald's golden arches, the Playboy bunny, IBM's logo)

Marks that describe a feature of the product, or that are based upon a person's name or geographical location, are generally unprotectable. However, once the owner can demonstrate public awareness of the mark through advertising, product sales or other means, then it develops a "secondary meaning" and may be registered. Examples include:

* people's names (Ben & Jerry's, Calvin Klein, Procter & Gamble)
* geographic terms (Bank of America, New York Life)
* words that describe the product or service - (Burger King, Jiffy Lube)
* slogans - "Just do it" (Nike), "We do chicken right" (KFC), "Quality is job 1" (Ford)[

What is non-trademarkable?

Several types of terms are not protected under copyright law and can not be registered:

* marks confusingly similar to existing marks - A mark is not subject to protection if it is too similar in spelling, sound or appearance and is used for similar goods or services (a new sportswear company could not call itself Nikee).
* generic terms - A mark can not be protected if it is simply the name of the goods themselves (a soft drink called Pop).
* weak marks that have not achieved secondary meaning - The owner must demonstrate that the public recognizes the mark as unique to their product (Joe's Bar would not qualify).
* abandoned trademarks - If the mark is no longer in use and the owner has indicated intent not to resume use, it is not protected.
* functional features - A functional element of a product or its packaging, as opposed to a decorative element. Note that this may be protectable under a design patent.
* titles of literary or artistic works - Titles of books, movies and music can not generally be trademarked (or copyrighted). It can be if it is used to brand a series of books (Chicken Soup for the Soul), or related products (Star Wars toys).
 
So I guess its a race to see who can establish a secondary meaning first for the word Scarlet: Red or LG. I wonder if it will come down to who has more advertising dollars.

Um, by the way, LilRed, you'll have to change your screen name. It has Red in it with a capital 'R'. :)


EDIT:

By the way, 'TheThe' is a trademarked screen name of 'Double The Industries'. Any use of such wording by any other entity that is not me is hereby strictly forbidden on this or any other forum. In fact, just to play it safe, I recommend that all of you stop using the word 'The' altogether, you know, just to be on the safe side and not risk drawing the ire of 'Double The Industries'. So no more The, please.
 
US and International copyright law states that you have to "defend" your copyright or you lose it. The way companies prove that they are defending their copyright is by bringing cases upon infringer's. Hence why you see so many superficial nonsensical suits. It's all a very standard aspect of copyright law.
 
Jannard said:
They actually registered their mark AFTER we did in the US and most (all but two) countries. And they acknowledged reading reduser. Just so you know...

Jim
Click to expand...
:) :)
 
GPSchnyder said:
Is digitalredvolution okay as the name for my blog about the Scarlet? I don't say that I own RED or something like this. I just am a Fanboy trying to show other guys what the Scarlet is.

Hope I won't be sued, please talk to me before, we can arrange something I think ;-)

But to be honest I don't think this will be a problem at all. :w00t:

-george
Click to expand...
It's called fair use. Your blog should be fine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top