3 ms·

doesn't seem too likely, a trademark at $1 million, means if you are the current owner, you'd be out of pocket $10k, and if it is worth 1 million, that shouldn'

doesn't seem too likely, a trademark at $1 million, means if you are the current owner, you'd be out of pocket $10k, and if it is worth 1 million, that shouldn't be a problem. The troll would be out $1 million. Having paid $990k to the current owner. Not that I think it's a good idea....but it's an interesting idea :)

bruce511 4y ago
But all this idea does is reinforce the conclusion of the article. Big companies with deep pockets get what they want, not by being right, but because the cost of fighting is too high. Using the scheme suggested, any big company can simply buy any trademark they like. Whereas the little guy is now taxed annually just to stay where he is. So a rounding error for Microsoft means I have to pony up some extra tax (10k? 100k?) every year, or lose my small niche trademark? This seems to come up a lot when discussing copyright, patent, or trade mark reforms. There seems to be a desire to reduce the power of say a Disney, but the proposed solution has the exact opposite effect.
- eru 4y ago
  > Using the scheme suggested, any big company can simply buy any trademark they like. Whereas the little guy is now taxed annually just to stay where he is. Everyone is taxed. The big guys with more valuable trademarks even more.