11 ms·
T-Mobile demand Lemonade to stop using the color magenta
- kuschku 7y agoThis might seem like overreach, but is just a natural consequence of trademark laws. If you can trademark a name as simple as "apple", and if you can trademark an icon as simple as 4 squares of identical size and shape next to another (windows/microsoft), then it becomes quite obvious that colors are treated the same. In the end, trademark laws as a whole will have to be reformed, but this is just a natural consequence of the current laws.
- Yuval_Halevi 7y agoWell, there is a thing called colormark, But as far as I know, color marks apply to companies from the same industry. T-Mobile and Lemonade are not in the same industry therefore, Lemonade should be able to use Magenta.
- mc32 7y agoEven trade marks are like that thus Toyota Lexus and Lexis Nexus can coexist, though a court case had to settle that dispute.
- Someone1234 7y agoThey both sell insurance, so one could argue they are in the same industry. Unless we're going to sub-divide insurance between Home/Car and Phone.
- smhenderson 7y agoIMHO selling insurance as a form of extended warranty on a physical product is not the same thing. I see what you're saying but I just don't see the average consumer confusing the two brands just because T-Mobile happens to sell insurance for their phones. They also sell cell phones but I don't think of them as a cell phone company, they're simply a carrier.
- Someone1234 7y agoT-Mobile don't just sell "extended warranties" they also sell theft, accidental damage, and similar even on phones (on their network) you didn't buy from them (e.g. €10/month). There's no distinction between what they do and other insurance companies insuring the same product class do. So as I said, unless you sub-divide the insurance industry on arbitrary lines, they are both selling insurance to the consumer. Claiming that because it is only "extended warranties" (which it isn't anyway) isn't really a legal argument for trademark law. We're talking about markets here, they're both in the insurance market regardless of how you frame it.
- HenryBemis 7y ago>They both sell insurance.. Does anyone know whether T-Mobile sell THEIR insurance or they act as brokers selling someone else's insurance (e.g. Allianz, AXA, etc.)? I also wonder the % of revenue of T-Mobile from insurance Vs their other business lines. (I don't really wonder)
- Someone1234 7y agoMost consumer insurance companies are selling upstream insurance. They buy insurance wholesale, and then resell it making a cut and taking care of the customer facing part. T-Mobile does the same. So in that way they're no different than any other type of consumer insurance company.
- pmiller2 7y agoT-Mobile sells insurance on devices they also sell. I have never seen a dedicated insurance company selling insurance specifically on mobile devices. The likelihood of consumer confusion is tiny.
- fgonzag 7y agoThat's like saying that blizzard and oracle are competitors because they are both in the software industry. If you can't substitute the product from one company with another, then they are not competitors. In this case, if you can't buy phone insurance (the product you would buy from T-Mobile) from Lemonade, they are not competitors.
- jascii 7y agoAccording to the article, there might be a problem there as T-Mobile does offer several forms of insurance: Things like mobile device insurance and cybersecurity insurance.
- freehunter 7y agoAnd therein lies the obvious conclusion of allowing conglomerations. If one company has their foot in every possible industry, they can yield control far beyond what would normally be considered unreasonable. I mean we are actually discussing “T-Mobile isn’t a mobile carrier, they’re an insurance company”.
- red_trumpet 7y agoRather "T-Mobile I'd a mobile carrier AND an insurance company".
- HenryBemis 7y agoKnowing T-Mobile and the full-of-shiteness that I possesses them, they can argue this about every market. I am.sure they own a canteen somewhere so there goes the food industry, and they probably sponsor some major team so there goes sports equipment and so on and so forth. Greed doesn't stop.
- Bagel 7y agoThe issue the article points to is both companies provide insurance products: Lemonade for renters and T-Mobile for its own handsets. I’m not convinced the average consumer would be confused by the two, however.
- JohnJamesRambo 7y ago>then it becomes quite obvious that colors are treated the same. Does it? Because that seems like nonsense.
- soared 7y agoYou have a gross misunderstanding of how it works. You can't trademark the entire word "apple" you can trademark the the word apple within a set of industries. You can't start a computer/isp/copy machine company called apple, but you definitely can start a woodworking shop called apple.
- ceejayoz 7y agoAn example of how this gets dicey when you expand into new industries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
- kuschku 7y agoAnd Telekom trademarked the color magenta for the industries they're active in - such as mobile phone insurance or cybersecurity insurance, which happens to be the same industry Lemonade is active in.
- mproud 7y agoColor is an interesting thing, however. Because there are only so many colors to go around. Imagine if companies could reserve an entire letter. All words beginning with that letter would belong to them.
- runxel 7y agoYou mean like Apple did with the lowercase "I"?
- ppseafield 7y agoOr rather, tried to do? https://www.smh.com.au/technology/apples-future-wont-be-brought-to-you-by-the-letter-i-20100312-q27r.html https://www.smh.com.au/technology/apples-future-wont-be-brou...
- pdpi 7y agoIt's not "natural consequences". Canonical counter example is this cease-and-desist for a book copying the Jack Daniels label design: https://mashable.com/2012/07/22/jack-daniels-trademark-letter/?europe=true https://mashable.com/2012/07/22/jack-daniels-trademark-lette...
- mark-r 7y agoI remember when Intel tried to trademark the number "80". Thankfully they lost that one.
- rvz 7y agoThis ownership of color is just ridiculous. By that logic, Google is literally using the Fuchsia color #FF00FF for Fuchsia OS which is literally classed a Magenta as the web color! T-Mobile, I dare you to sue Google.
- code4tee 7y agoUnfortunately they have to do this if they don’t want to lose the trademark. You can’t trademark something if it’s deemed to be of common use. Of course if your trademark is a color then this can be quite difficult.
- slenk 7y agoI am more amazed that they issued that patent in the first place. edit - sorry, mistake, I meant trademark. I didn't know that wording mistakes were downvoted so harshly. I am amazed they can even claim a trademark over magenta, is that better?
- lotsofpulp 7y agoTrademarks are not patents.
- polymatter 7y agotrademarks protect customers from confusion. copyright protects the right of an author not to have their work copied (without their permission) patents protect inventors from having their inventions used (without their permission)
- PhasmaFelis 7y ago> Unfortunately they have to do this if they don’t want to lose the trademark. That's what the lawyers say, anyway. Thousands of companies manage to do business for decades without egregious trademark actions.
- ummonk 7y agoConsider this scenario: Company A has a trademark. Company B creates its own product (perhaps trademarked as well) which is somewhat similar to Company A's trademark but in a sufficiently different product space that a lawsuit by Company A would seem potentially frivolous. Company B then grows its business over several years, starts moving into adjacent product categories, and ends up with a product that now could get mixed up with Company A's. Company A sues Company B, but Company B argues that it has invested a lot into its own brand, and Company A should have been policing its brand years ago to make sure Company B doesn't end up investing in a brand that Company A would end up considering infringing down the road.
- markstos 7y agoWorth reading just for the colorful puns.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- asperous 7y agoFor some background, the reason these laws exist is to protect consumers from counterfeiters. If someone produces jewelry in a clean baby blue box, customers will start to expect that same level of quality, etc. They will be ripped off if someone else uses the same packaging but a low quality product. However many things have to be considered from the consumers perspective. Is there likely confusion? Is one of the main things courts are supposed to consider.
- penagwin 7y agoYeah I don't understand their reasoning here. If some cell service company started using the colors of verizon/sprint/T-mobile I could see that as confusing and potentially misleading. But outside of their market, they should have no say on who uses that color.
- techwizrd 7y agoFrom the article, there is overlap in their markets. To add even more color to the kerfuffle, Lemonade filed a motion yesterday with the European intellectual property office to loosen Deutsche’s legal vice-grip on the color, and has petitioned to remove DT’s color-rights on magenta in the insurance sector. The problem is, T-Mobile actually does offer insurance on services like cybersecurity and tech-gadget protection policies, which could add a touch of gray to the magenta dispute.
- pitaj 7y agoPlease don't quote with code blocks. It's painful to scroll horizontally, especially for mobile users. Without code blocks: > To add even more color to the kerfuffle, Lemonade filed a motion yesterday with the European intellectual property office to loosen Deutsche’s legal vice-grip on the color, and has petitioned to remove DT’s color-rights on magenta in the insurance sector. > The problem is, T-Mobile actually does offer insurance on services like cybersecurity and tech-gadget protection policies, which could add a touch of gray to the magenta dispute.
- ajna91 7y agoThere needs to be some kind of association for shared defense against bullies. Increase the cost of patent/IP trolling while reducing the risk of defending. NATO for small-businesses and startups.
- soamv 7y agoThey're not even using the same pink! So this isn't just a usual "trademarks just work this way" thing, it's also a question of how much of the colorspace a trademark can own. The techcrunch article is a bit more informative -- https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/04/lemonade-gets-a-nastygram-from-deutsche-telekom-over-its-use-of-magenta-says-it-will-fight/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/04/lemonade-gets-a-nastygram-...
- skykooler 7y agoI'm going to trademark the color blue. Now every silicon valley startup is infringing.
- tracker1 7y agoI bet if your company was named IBN and you used a similar font and shade of blue to IBM's, you'd be hearing from their lawyers. In this case, I don't think a typical consumer would see brand confusion, which is really the benchmark for trademark enforcement usually.
- rflrob 7y agoA comment elsewhere here links to a color comparison. Looking at them, I doubt I could tell you which one is T-Mobile and which is Lemonade with confidence greater than chance.
- ummonk 7y agoOh, I could immediately recognize which one was T-Mobile when I looked at the comparison. T-Mobile has a subdued magenta, whereas Lemonade uses bright hot pink. You can see the stark difference on their websites as well (though when you hover over one of the Lemonade buttons, it looks practically identical to the T-Mobile magenta).
- soamv 7y agoI believe both of you :) Human color perception is weird like that.
- jpmattia 7y agoImagine the implications once you consider there are people who are color blind (and you are all hereby on notice that I own the color CCCCCC.)
- jddj 7y agoI think you'll find that colourblind people don't typically see the world in grey scale.
- WillDaSilva 7y agoModern trademark laws (and IP laws in general) are generally upsetting. It seems like they exist primarily for the benefit of large established players. Nevermind that owning the exclusive rights to use a particular colour in this way is absurd.
- ummonk 7y agoHonestly, I'm not sure the laws are the issue, but rather the cost of fighting lawsuits in the courts.
- cgb223 7y agoI hate when I buy renters insurance only to find out it’s a national cellphone carrier...
- JadeNB 7y agoNot that it makes it much less silly, but the article mentions: > The problem is, T-Mobile actually does offer insurance on services like cybersecurity and tech-gadget protection policies, which could add a touch of gray to the magenta dispute.
- teh_klev 7y agoSlightly tangentially O2 (Telefonica) my mobile provider also sold my car insurance (though underwritten by Ageas), they weren't even a consideration until they popped up with a good deal on a comparison site.
- dheera 7y agoMaybe Lemonade (insurance) should sue Lemonade (buffet restaurant) for word infringement. Then they can sue someone else. Eventually it will loop back to T-Mo.
- Hamcha 7y agoProps to Lemonade for fighting the claim. I just hope EU/German laws are as punishing as US ones when it comes to trademark abuse.
- mendelk 7y agoFor those curious, based on the CSS on their respective websites, they aren't _exactly_ the same HEX color, just pretty similar. (Lemonade is #ff0083, while T-Mobile is #e20074. Comparison here: https://www.colorcombos.com/combotester.html?color0=e20074&color1=ff0083 https://www.colorcombos.com/combotester.html?color0=e20074&c...)
- initium 7y agoCase closed :)
- Yuval_Halevi 7y agoYou're from Germany by any chance? I think that in Lemonade german site, they changed the color to a darker pink (probably until the issue with T-mobile is finished)
- mendelk 7y agoI'm not from Germany, but I did notice that they changed the color for the German site. My comparison is to the American site.
- chefandy 7y agoWell, based on a 2017 version of their site in archive.org, their 'pink' is rgb(214, 0, 109) while T-Mobile's current pink is rgb(226, 0, 116). Not the same, but as a graphic designer, I think they'd be visually indistinguishable for most people unless comparing bordering swatches. But fuck T-Mobile though. Magenta is a primary color in most types of print. That they can somehow stop other people from using it is bullshit.
- thomasz 7y agoIn the late 90's, early 2000's, they aggressively tried to intimidate each and everyone using the letter T for any marketing purposes.
- 7y ago
- Grokify 7y agoLyft also has a similar color as T-Mobile. Did T-Mobile make the same ask of Lyft?
- 0xdead 7y agoWhat's next? Sue Lemonade for using 'L', 'e', 'm' and 'o' alphabets because they're also used in T-mobile's name?
- parliament32 7y agoBoth trademark and copyright laws need reforms, and fast. This is getting ridiculous, they're not even in the same industry.
- onychomys 7y agoAlthough this is clearly ridiculous, it does seem a little odd that Lemonade isn't using a bright shade of yellow.
- alluro2 7y agoI was slightly irritated by the same - what's the logic behind such branding? Imagine "Orange Mobile" using purple as their primary brand color...
- redwall_hp 7y agoPink lemonade is a thing. It's just lemonade with food dye, but it's a common thing to do for some reason.
- thrower123 7y agoIt's not unprecedented, by any means. John Deere has won cases against companies using its trademarked green and yellow color scheme. Granted, that was within the same industry. https://www.deere.com/en/our-company/news-and-announcements/news-releases/2017/corporate/2017oct17-deere-wins-trademark-lawsuit/ https://www.deere.com/en/our-company/news-and-announcements/...
- cameldrv 7y agoGreen and Yellow, on tractors, is quite a bit more narrow than Magenta, in any industry.
- nsxwolf 7y agoIs this where minimalistic flat design eventually ends up? Trademarking colors?
- TimTheTinker 7y agoThis is incredibly ridiculous. If a color can be owned by a trademark, what’s to prevent a particular audio frequency being trademarked, or a particular temperature, or a particular luminosity? What if my construction company trademarked “8 meters” — could I go and sue everyone who builds 8-meter-high buildings from then on? Good on Lemonade for fighting it. But something is really wrong with the world when claims like Deutsche Telekom’s are taken seriously in the first place. This is almost like the “illegal number” involved in decss years ago. Here’s the color: #e20074
- bityard 7y agoYou sound surprised that it is possible to trademark a color. This has been part of intellectual property law for quite some time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_trade_mark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_trade_mark I'm not saying I agree that colors should be trademarked, just that it's fairly common practice.
- TimTheTinker 7y ago> You sound surprised that it is possible to trademark a color. Is it only goodwill that is keeping Crayola from suing everyone? No one ought to have the right to prevent others from using a color of all things. It’s like kindergarten all over again... “That’s my crayon! You give it back!”
- sidlls 7y agoThat isn't how trademarks work.
- ARandomerDude 7y agoThe problem is it's too broad a claim. Trademarking a color is limited to (1) a specific competitive space, and (2) when it is a distinctive identifier of your brand (e.g., DeWalt's yellow and black scheme in the power tools business). T-Mobile is in the telecom business, and Lemonade is in the residential insurance business. T-Mobile should not be trying to take-down a company that is not in their competitive space for using the same color on their website. I am not a lawyer, but I have dealt with this at work. This is not legal advice.
- makecheck 7y agoProtections should only apply to things that add something beyond basic elements. For example, it might make sense to allow a particular pairing of colors to be attributed and protected, since that at least requires more creativity than picking a single color. This is like telling everyone that you now own the letter “D” so no one can ever use that in a word again.
- 7952 7y agoThe basic elements of colour that most people perceive is pretty limited. But within just "pink" there are lots of different shades that have different properties and need careful thought. I think there is something here more than just the basic elements. But it is not always obvious or objectively measurable.
- knolax 7y agoSounds like a fun math excercise: For any trademark of color T(represented as a vector in RGB colorspace), the chance that a brand using color C can be successfully sued is equal to 1-k*||T-C||, where k is lesser than 1 divided by the maximum distance between any two points in RGB colorspace. Find the minimum number of trademarks needed so that for any color the chance of successfully suing is greater than or equal to P.
- codereflection 7y agoThis reminds me of a similar case between SparkFun and Fluke from 2014 where Fluke demanded that SparkFun stop selling their own multimeters which had the same colors as the Fluke brand multimeters. https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1428 https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1428
- dheera 7y agoPlenty of yellow multimeters (not Fluke copies) made outside the USA where nobody cares about their childish crayon hoarding. And people wonder why stuff isn't made in USA anymore?
- helpPeople 7y agoTMobile I demand you stop calling your internet service UNLIMITED. It's not, there's tons of fine print and multiple limits.
- newnewpdro 7y agoCyan, Yellow, and Black called, they want their color back.
- Animats 7y agoThere's a good overview of color trademarks here.[1] [1] https://www.colormatters.com/color-and-marketing/color-branding-legal-rights https://www.colormatters.com/color-and-marketing/color-brand...
- inlined 7y agoThis article led me down a Wikipedia trial until this interesting defense against trademark infringement: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_moron_in_a_hurry https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_moron_in_a_hurry
- Balanceinfinity 7y agoand pink insulation foam https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/774/1116/10307/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/774...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- tln 7y agoThis is worrisome, because they claiming a broad swath of the colorspace around magenta. It's hard enough to get the exact right color, without worrying that huge players will assert copyright. FWIW I found this website useful when deciding on complementary colors; you can see how other companies have solved combinations. https://brandpalettes.com/ https://brandpalettes.com/ ... and here's what they have for T-mobile (no listing for lemonade) https://brandpalettes.com/t-mobile-color-codes/ https://brandpalettes.com/t-mobile-color-codes/
- uuri8n 7y agoThe “protect people from counterfeiters” argument is a laughable defense This is supply side protectionism at its root Release a proper spec and let people implement These rules enable protection for a middle man who owns a logo but otherwise produces none of the physical equipment or theory behind the functionality itself It’s exactly the sort of nonsense ownership we need less of Make these CEO actually contribute literally not through popularity contests and regulatory capture
- schuyler2d 7y agoParticularly ironic based on the history of the Beatles' "Apple Records" (music) suing Apple, Inc (tech) around apple logos. Here it's T-Mobile (tech) suing Lemonade (music) over a color.
- atombender 7y agoLemonade is an insurance company, not music.
- hateful 7y agoUnrelated to the post, but I'm reminded that the color in question (at least as far as light goes) does not actually exist and is made up by our brains: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9dqJRyk0YM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9dqJRyk0YM
- futhey 7y agoTLDR; Clickbait headline. This is a fairly common practice. T-Mobile has filed and enforces a color mark, a type of trademark, as do many other corporations, for a specific shade of pink known as RAL 4010. Not the entire magenta range.