7 ms·
I don't see a problem with trademarking colors for a particular brand, it can be an integral part of a brands identity, and copycats using the same colors can c
by pavon 4y ago
I don't see a problem with trademarking colors for a particular brand, it can be an integral part of a brands identity, and copycats using the same colors can cause consumer confusion. The problem is that there is no penalty for aggressively "enforcing" it beyond the small scope in which it was granted. This is true for many aspects of trademark law in general, not just color. That is what we need to crack down on. The USPTO should be stricter about limiting the list of goods and products that trademarks are filed for, and there should be penalties for threatening companies for using the trademark in areas that are clearly outside of those.
- mc32 4y agoThis is exemplified by powertool brands which have distinct color schemes for their Tools: Milwaukee (Red & Black), DeWalt (Yellow & Black), Fein (Orange), Makita (Teal), Ryobi (Chartreuse), etc. Some competitors have similar but not identical color schemes, for example Milwaukee vs Craftsman, Fein vs Ridgid. Though I don't think any "own" the colors in the color schemes --but I could be wrong.
- m463 4y agoDewalt is interesting, because I always thought they copied industrial/pro colors, like caterpillar
- mc32 4y agoOh, you bring up something interesting now. I think Deere, has a "Deere green" (not the song).
- analog31 4y agoMy dad has an ancient DeWalt radial arm saw, and it's green.
- Smoosh 4y agoMaybe, but yellow & black is also standard colour combination for industrial safety.
- bdowling 4y agoDeWalt won't be able to stop a competitor from selling yellow and black safety tape because the color is essential to the functioning of the product. The color of a cordless power tool, however, is not essential to its function; the color could be red, orange, chartreuse, blue, and the tool would work just as well.
- humaniania 4y agoStanley tools are also black and yellow.
- cpwright 4y agoDewalt is one of Stanley Black and Decker's brands. But I don' think they offer many power tools under the Stanley brand (though now SBD is using Dewalt for hand tools like tape measures, etc.).
- Bluecobra 4y agoFluke’s trademarks were able to prevent a competitor from importing yellow multimeters and getting stuck in customs: https://hackaday.com/2014/03/19/multimeters-without-a-country-flukes-broad-trademark-bans-yellow-multimeter-imports/ https://hackaday.com/2014/03/19/multimeters-without-a-countr... Though they made good on this incident: https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1430 https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1430
- tyrfing 4y agoIt's a bit misleading to say "yellow", it's the combination of dark gray body with yellow. Copying their branding with black instead of dark gray is fine, if Amazon is anything to go by.
- msrenee 4y agoThis one crosses the line for me. There's a reason tools are brightly colored. It makes them easier to find in the mess of whatever you're trying to build or repair. If a yellow multimeter with a dark grey face can be trademarked and defended successfully, what about a tape measure with an orange or yellow case and black on the side? The yellow or orange is a functional part of the product. To say we have the trademark when you combine it with something as generic as dark grey on the face is ridiculous to me.
- tyrfing 4y ago> what about a tape measure with an orange or yellow case and black on the side? Interesting you should mention that, since Stanley has a trademark on a particular layout with yellow on the side. I don't think it's particularly ridiculous, although I work for a company that is synonymous with a color. These are after using the particular consistent color branding for 20 years, 50 years, 100 years. After a generation or two, people associate the color with the category, but there are tons of other colors, even for specific criteria like "high viz". Entirely yellow is fine! Fluorescent green is fine! Light grey and yellow is fine.
- 4y ago
- t_mann 4y agoDisagree. There's no need for trademarked colours to be able to go against copycats. In the EU it's illegal to buy (not just sell) copycat items like fake Louis-Vuitton bags (or even to bring one from your holiday), and that's not based on colour but on a much broader view of deception. We shouldn't support the overreach of trademark law into such basic aspects of life, period. The Coca-Cola red that is shown as trademarked there is about as generic as it gets, no one should be able to lay claim to this, even against other drink makers.
- tshaddox 4y agoAren’t you just describing what trademarks are though? Yes, as you say, the whole point is that you cannot confuse consumers about the origin of your product. And all a trademark is is a public record of a distinguishing characteristic that, if you use that characteristic for your product in a certain context, is likely to confuse consumers.
- jay_kyburz 4y agoRe using colors can be helpful for consumers. In the potato chip market in Australia, across multiple brands, purple means salt and vinegar, green means chicken, yellow means cheese and onion, blue means plain salt. In the soft drink isle, red means cola, yellow means lemon, orange means orange, etc.
- eru 4y agoOne problem is that you have to enforce your trademark, if you don't want to lose it.
- tialaramex 4y ago[None of this is legal advice of course] Nope. The trademark people don't have some magic "Oh you didn't defend your trademark, now it's gone" feature. There is no meter somewhere measuring how "defended" your mark is, and when it reaches 0% the mark vanishes. If you are not enforcing certain rights you have, and people come to rely on that, a court might conclude (this is called Estoppel) that you lose the ability to chase them for the violation since apparently you didn't care. But you don't magically lose your ability to chase other people, nor to chase people for trampling on other rights that you do care about. You get to draw the line. The excuse that "We have to or we'd lose our trademark" is bullshit and people should be called on it when they try it. The closest is they'll cite examples like Hoover and Xerox where a name mark became so incredibly famous that it was synonymous with the whole class of object and courts ruled that as a result you could not assume when somebody says "Xerox this for me" they're referring to the protected mark any more. These companies, far from "losing" their trademark, instead are huge successful businesses who still have their marks but are not allowed to extend those marks into our whole lives. If you put a Xerox brand on knock-off copiers or printers don't worry, they still have a trademark, they will still sue and they will still win.
- ajsnigrutin 4y agoI disagree. If we used copyrights as an comparison, where copyrighting a book is indeed ok, this would be like copyrighing a word, eg "Harry". Yes, Harry Potter is a brandname, but there are many other people named Harry, some of them might even be in magic books, and atleast one of them was a magician (although a different kind) before the Harry Potter books were even written. A color is a color... pink is pink, magenga is magenta, and if you go into a market large enough, and and everyone tradmarked a color, soon, there would be no distinct colors left.. want to open a restaurant with a red logo? Nope, kfc... yellow? nope, mcdonalds.. green? nope, starbucks. Blue? nope, white castle.