4 ms·

This 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

This 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 ago
Well, 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 ago
  Even trade marks are like that thus Toyota Lexus and Lexis Nexus can coexist, though a court case had to settle that dispute.
- Someone1234 7y ago
  They 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 ago
    IMHO 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 ago
      T-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 ago
      Most 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 ago
    T-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 ago
    That'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 ago
  According 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 ago
    And 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 ago
      Rather "T-Mobile I'd a mobile carrier AND an insurance company".
  - HenryBemis 7y ago
    Knowing 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 ago
  The 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 ago
You 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 ago
  An 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 ago
  And 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 ago
Color 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 ago
  You mean like Apple did with the lowercase "I"?
  - ppseafield 7y ago
    Or 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 ago
It'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 ago
I remember when Intel tried to trademark the number "80". Thankfully they lost that one.

Yuval_Halevi 7y ago

Well, 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 ago
Even trade marks are like that thus Toyota Lexus and Lexis Nexus can coexist, though a court case had to settle that dispute.
Someone1234 7y ago
They 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 ago
  IMHO 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 ago
    T-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 ago
    Most 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 ago
  T-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 ago
  That'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 ago
According 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 ago
  And 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 ago
    Rather "T-Mobile I'd a mobile carrier AND an insurance company".
- HenryBemis 7y ago
  Knowing 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 ago
The 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 ago

You 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 ago
An 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 ago
And 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 ago

Color 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 ago
You mean like Apple did with the lowercase "I"?
- ppseafield 7y ago
  Or 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 ago

It'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 ago

I remember when Intel tried to trademark the number "80". Thankfully they lost that one.