5 ms·

OK that makes a great amount of sense using the differentiation between fair use, satire, etc. In the case of the Nissan's, it seems less clear. As the Nissan

by _eht 9y ago

OK that makes a great amount of sense using the differentiation between fair use, satire, etc. In the case of the Nissan's, it seems less clear. As the Nissan Computer domain holder, he registered the domains and had an established business before Nissan Car had any interest. What would stop him from pivoting into car manufacturing/sales and even if he called his company something different, used nissan.com to promote his car sales?

yebyen 9y ago
Trademarks are not patents or copyright, there is no special protection for "getting there first" and the owner of a strong brand can absolutely (and in some cases must) use legal muscle to assert their rights over those people who got there first, in order to maintain the protection of the Trademark on their brands. They do not always have to open with "cease and desist" -- alternatively they can even offer a license to use the mark, but if they are derelict at enforcing their TM brand then all of their associated legal protections can be taken away. If you publish a work under copyright and someone steals it, you win if you can prove that your work came first. If you are sued for patent infringement and you can prove prior art, you can potentially get the patent thrown out under review. If you are "Mike Rowe Soft" independent software developer and went into business years before Microsoft existed, but nobody knows you, you will lose because your brand is confusingly similar and your market domain significantly intersects the more well-established mark. (This is actually a real case, and that was his real name.) Microsoft can file an injunction forcing you to change your (company's) name and to cease and desist from any marketing that uses a mark that is confusingly similar, and they will win, even though you got there first. Just different systems for protecting different types of intellectual property. It's understandable that you would be confused.

by _eht 9y ago

yebyen 9y ago

Trademarks are not patents or copyright, there is no special protection for "getting there first" and the owner of a strong brand can absolutely (and in some cases must) use legal muscle to assert their rights over those people who got there first, in order to maintain the protection of the Trademark on their brands. They do not always have to open with "cease and desist" -- alternatively they can even offer a license to use the mark, but if they are derelict at enforcing their TM brand then all of their associated legal protections can be taken away. If you publish a work under copyright and someone steals it, you win if you can prove that your work came first. If you are sued for patent infringement and you can prove prior art, you can potentially get the patent thrown out under review. If you are "Mike Rowe Soft" independent software developer and went into business years before Microsoft existed, but nobody knows you, you will lose because your brand is confusingly similar and your market domain significantly intersects the more well-established mark. (This is actually a real case, and that was his real name.) Microsoft can file an injunction forcing you to change your (company's) name and to cease and desist from any marketing that uses a mark that is confusingly similar, and they will win, even though you got there first. Just different systems for protecting different types of intellectual property. It's understandable that you would be confused.