3 ms·

> They could argue it is a different category than the toy company, but I think that line of argument is already lost given they are using LEGO style bricks on

> They could argue it is a different category than the toy company, but I think that line of argument is already lost given they are using LEGO style bricks on the website It helps that it is a different product. They could put down Pikachu iconography and that doesn't make the product similar to Pikachu. All colored bricks are not (yet) under Mattel's control. I think there's wiggle room.

PeterisP 7y ago
LEGO trademark registration https://trademarks.justia.com/745/93/lego-74593028.html https://trademarks.justia.com/745/93/lego-74593028.html registers the trademarks also in all the major categories where software can fall in, and so it's upon LegoOS to demonstrate that there's no way that an uninformed consumer might confuse and think that they're related (which is IMHO impossible, given a single look at their homepage). It also explictly lists that the trademark is used (among other things) for educational computer programs, computer accessories, entertainment services in the nature of providing facilities for playing computer games, conducting workshops for instruction in the use of computer software, etc - and that's true, I personally know a bunch of software products with the LEGO™ brand. As the trademark is both used and registered not only for plastic bricks but also in the field of software, naming a product LegoOS by itself would invite a trademark claim, and putting a red brick (that's not registered, but definitely does create an association for the average consumer, which matters very much in trademark claims) on the homepage just removes any maneuvering space; IMHO it'd be a slam-dunk guaranteed immediate injunction if LEGO sends a C&D that gets contested. And the practice of trademark law means that they pretty much must sent a C&D, not doing so would be quite bad for them.

PeterisP 7y ago

LEGO trademark registration https://trademarks.justia.com/745/93/lego-74593028.html https://trademarks.justia.com/745/93/lego-74593028.html registers the trademarks also in all the major categories where software can fall in, and so it's upon LegoOS to demonstrate that there's no way that an uninformed consumer might confuse and think that they're related (which is IMHO impossible, given a single look at their homepage). It also explictly lists that the trademark is used (among other things) for educational computer programs, computer accessories, entertainment services in the nature of providing facilities for playing computer games, conducting workshops for instruction in the use of computer software, etc - and that's true, I personally know a bunch of software products with the LEGO™ brand. As the trademark is both used and registered not only for plastic bricks but also in the field of software, naming a product LegoOS by itself would invite a trademark claim, and putting a red brick (that's not registered, but definitely does create an association for the average consumer, which matters very much in trademark claims) on the homepage just removes any maneuvering space; IMHO it'd be a slam-dunk guaranteed immediate injunction if LEGO sends a C&D that gets contested. And the practice of trademark law means that they pretty much must sent a C&D, not doing so would be quite bad for them.