3 ms·

Trane, a company that designs and manufactures residential and commercial heating and cooling systems: https://www.trane.com/index.html https://www.trane.com/i

Trane, a company that designs and manufactures residential and commercial heating and cooling systems: https://www.trane.com/index.html https://www.trane.com/index.html

userbinator 4y ago
That's what came to my mind too. I would be careful with attempting to reuse previous trademarks.
- causality0 4y ago
  Same. If this gets any success at all he's gonna get hit with a C&D pretty quick.
  - maroonblazer 4y ago
    Because...residential and commercial heating/cooling systems and spaced repetition CLI apps are easily confused...?
    - imgabe 4y ago
      Not having a case doesn't prevent you from sending scary letters when you have lawyers on retainer.
    - blooalien 4y ago
      … deleted …
      - TheDong 4y ago
        This is a misleading statement. The only reason to fight for a trademark is if you are at the risk of "genericization", like happened to Kleenex or Xerox. If someone else is using your trademark to refer to something that is a substitute for your product (i.e. using Kleenex to refer to another brand of tissue paper), that's where you need to step up. However, that's an exception. In general, you just have to actively use your trademark in relation to your product to keep it, and you are not required to fight other companies who make similar trademarks but do not risk genericazation. This case is very clearly a case where the term is being used in a totally different non-confusing way, which means it's both not a trademark violation, and also that there's no risk of genericization occurring. The two things in question are so different it would be like suggesting that Apple has to sue my local coffee shop to retain its "Cocoa" trademark (the software UX toolkit) since my local coffee shop sells cocoa.
        blooalien 4y ago
        Eat a giant bag of festering pus-filled donkey dicks.
        dang 4y ago
        Yikes! This kind of thing will get you banned on HN. I'm not going to ban you right now because I didn't see other examples of it when I skimmed through your history just now, and I did see other comments that were good HN posts. But please don't do it again, regardless of how wrong or bad some other comment is or you feel it is. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
        causality0 4y ago
        dang I want some of whatever medication you're on that lets you maintain this level of even-handed calmness.
        dang 4y ago
        The power of repetition.
m0llusk 4y ago
Back in the 90s they made an amazingly robust floppy disk duplicator.

Trane, a company that designs and manufactures residential and commercial heating and cooling systems: https://www.trane.com/index.html https://www.trane.com/index.html

userbinator 4y ago

That's what came to my mind too. I would be careful with attempting to reuse previous trademarks.

causality0 4y ago
Same. If this gets any success at all he's gonna get hit with a C&D pretty quick.
- maroonblazer 4y ago
  Because...residential and commercial heating/cooling systems and spaced repetition CLI apps are easily confused...?
  - imgabe 4y ago
    Not having a case doesn't prevent you from sending scary letters when you have lawyers on retainer.
  - blooalien 4y ago
    … deleted …
    - TheDong 4y ago
      This is a misleading statement. The only reason to fight for a trademark is if you are at the risk of "genericization", like happened to Kleenex or Xerox. If someone else is using your trademark to refer to something that is a substitute for your product (i.e. using Kleenex to refer to another brand of tissue paper), that's where you need to step up. However, that's an exception. In general, you just have to actively use your trademark in relation to your product to keep it, and you are not required to fight other companies who make similar trademarks but do not risk genericazation. This case is very clearly a case where the term is being used in a totally different non-confusing way, which means it's both not a trademark violation, and also that there's no risk of genericization occurring. The two things in question are so different it would be like suggesting that Apple has to sue my local coffee shop to retain its "Cocoa" trademark (the software UX toolkit) since my local coffee shop sells cocoa.
      - blooalien 4y ago
        Eat a giant bag of festering pus-filled donkey dicks.
        dang 4y ago
        Yikes! This kind of thing will get you banned on HN. I'm not going to ban you right now because I didn't see other examples of it when I skimmed through your history just now, and I did see other comments that were good HN posts. But please don't do it again, regardless of how wrong or bad some other comment is or you feel it is. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
        causality0 4y ago
        dang I want some of whatever medication you're on that lets you maintain this level of even-handed calmness.
        dang 4y ago
        The power of repetition.

m0llusk 4y ago

Back in the 90s they made an amazingly robust floppy disk duplicator.