6 ms·

Is this legal?

by faeyanpiraat 5y ago

Is this legal?

oh_sigh 5y ago
The program, yes. The name, probably not.
- luastoned 5y ago
  The fact that it's sold, most likely not.
  - saurik 5y ago
    That makes no difference: while I am not a layer and you absolutely should contact your lawyer before doing something like this to get your ducks in a row (and generally you would thereby be a fool to use what I say as "legal advice"), the relevant fair use here comes from legal precedent and even explicit exemptions required to ensure "software interoperability", not some concept surrounding "non-commercial use" (which I think is highly unlikely to protect you in almost any situation).
- saurik 5y ago
  Which is always where these projects get screwed: the lawyers are able to get easy cease and desists and make credible threats for leverage merely due to trademark law; and yet somehow people make this same mistake over and over again :/.
- bellyfullofbac 5y ago
  Yeah, the Bose legal department is probably laughing right now at the easy slam dunk... To elaborate, the lawyers will probably say the fact that it's made to work with their headphones, and the name which can be confused with theirs, means it's a misuse of their trademark, and it's confusing enough that people might think it's an official Bose app, and who knows what sort of nastiness might be hiding in there. Should've called it "esob app" or something. Or wait for the cease and desist and rename it to "Butt-Head Headphone Company app" (reference: [1]) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation#Libel_dispute_with_Carl_Sagan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation#Libel_di...
  - dkarras 5y ago
    And not because they are evil... IIKC you have to demonstrate your credible effort in defending your trademark or you risk legally losing it. So even if you are ok with such use, you still have to defend your trademark legally or it can bite you in the future.
  - goldcd 5y ago
    But then there would be a bit of a Streisand effect - as it draws attention to their lack of a non-phone tool to control their expensive headphones. If they were to just shut Boze down, then they'll have angry customers. If they were to create their own version of the tool, then most people would be happy. If they were also prepared to give the Boze creator a fraction of the money earmarked for their lawyers, to pull the app and point to the official one - then everybody's happy.
    - drawfloat 5y ago
      To the corporation, the value of protecting their trademark vastly outweighs any profit loss from pissing off the couple of hundred people who are using this app (who, coincidentally, already own Bose headphones).
js6i 5y ago
That's a program that you can run on your machine to interoperate with your peripherals. If we have concerns about this being legal, our standards for ownership are way too low.
- s_dev 5y ago
  The problem isn't the functionality -- it's the branding. boze.app for Bose headphones. Theres too much likeness.
altacc 5y ago
I think so. I believe that the Oracle vs Google case gave legal precedent that recreating the functionality of APIs from other companies is fair use.
- vxNsr 5y ago
  My understanding of that case is the ruling was very specific to it, the judges tried very hard NOT to make an precedent.

Is this legal?

oh_sigh 5y ago

The program, yes. The name, probably not.

luastoned 5y ago
The fact that it's sold, most likely not.
- saurik 5y ago
  That makes no difference: while I am not a layer and you absolutely should contact your lawyer before doing something like this to get your ducks in a row (and generally you would thereby be a fool to use what I say as "legal advice"), the relevant fair use here comes from legal precedent and even explicit exemptions required to ensure "software interoperability", not some concept surrounding "non-commercial use" (which I think is highly unlikely to protect you in almost any situation).
saurik 5y ago
Which is always where these projects get screwed: the lawyers are able to get easy cease and desists and make credible threats for leverage merely due to trademark law; and yet somehow people make this same mistake over and over again :/.
bellyfullofbac 5y ago
Yeah, the Bose legal department is probably laughing right now at the easy slam dunk... To elaborate, the lawyers will probably say the fact that it's made to work with their headphones, and the name which can be confused with theirs, means it's a misuse of their trademark, and it's confusing enough that people might think it's an official Bose app, and who knows what sort of nastiness might be hiding in there. Should've called it "esob app" or something. Or wait for the cease and desist and rename it to "Butt-Head Headphone Company app" (reference: [1]) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation#Libel_dispute_with_Carl_Sagan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation#Libel_di...
- dkarras 5y ago
  And not because they are evil... IIKC you have to demonstrate your credible effort in defending your trademark or you risk legally losing it. So even if you are ok with such use, you still have to defend your trademark legally or it can bite you in the future.
- goldcd 5y ago
  But then there would be a bit of a Streisand effect - as it draws attention to their lack of a non-phone tool to control their expensive headphones. If they were to just shut Boze down, then they'll have angry customers. If they were to create their own version of the tool, then most people would be happy. If they were also prepared to give the Boze creator a fraction of the money earmarked for their lawyers, to pull the app and point to the official one - then everybody's happy.
  - drawfloat 5y ago
    To the corporation, the value of protecting their trademark vastly outweighs any profit loss from pissing off the couple of hundred people who are using this app (who, coincidentally, already own Bose headphones).

js6i 5y ago

That's a program that you can run on your machine to interoperate with your peripherals. If we have concerns about this being legal, our standards for ownership are way too low.

s_dev 5y ago
The problem isn't the functionality -- it's the branding. boze.app for Bose headphones. Theres too much likeness.

altacc 5y ago

I think so. I believe that the Oracle vs Google case gave legal precedent that recreating the functionality of APIs from other companies is fair use.

vxNsr 5y ago
My understanding of that case is the ruling was very specific to it, the judges tried very hard NOT to make an precedent.