4 ms·

Those birds in the third screenshot look pretty much the same as the Angry Birds to me (I didn't compare them directly, but I don't think that's necessary anywa

by Luc 15y ago

Those birds in the third screenshot look pretty much the same as the Angry Birds to me (I didn't compare them directly, but I don't think that's necessary anyway). You're also directly advertising this with reference to Angry Birds (see title of this post). I'd say you're pretty much flouting basic trademark law here, and the only way for Rovio to react is to protect their trademark, or lose it. It's all the more likely if they are working on their own title from the viewpoint of the pigs - and I'd say the odds are pretty high that they are. In addition, the idea of this being parody is not something I'd want to defend in front of a judge...

nachteilig 15y ago
The birds are a question of copyright, not trademark. And one doesn't lose that for failing to defend it.
- starwed 15y ago
  I don't think its that simple. Wikipedia says >A trademark is typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements. There is also a range of non-conventional trademarks comprising marks which do not fall into these standard categories, such as those based on color, smell, or sound. I'd be surprised if Rovio doesn't consider the general appearance of the birds as a trademark. If you see a game in the app store represented by an angry bird like image, that's clearly going to create consumer confusion about the origin of the game.
  - philjr 15y ago
    You don't consider things trademarks, it's either a registered trademark or it's not.
    - Luc 15y ago
      That's not true. There's no need for a trademark to be registered or even to be indicated as being a trademark (typically by using 'TM'), though of course you do get extra rights if you do. The US Patent Office is a good resource for info: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp
- Luc 15y ago
  That bird design is to Rovio what Mickey is to Disney...

by Luc 15y ago

nachteilig 15y ago

The birds are a question of copyright, not trademark. And one doesn't lose that for failing to defend it.

starwed 15y ago
I don't think its that simple. Wikipedia says >A trademark is typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements. There is also a range of non-conventional trademarks comprising marks which do not fall into these standard categories, such as those based on color, smell, or sound. I'd be surprised if Rovio doesn't consider the general appearance of the birds as a trademark. If you see a game in the app store represented by an angry bird like image, that's clearly going to create consumer confusion about the origin of the game.
- philjr 15y ago
  You don't consider things trademarks, it's either a registered trademark or it's not.
  - Luc 15y ago
    That's not true. There's no need for a trademark to be registered or even to be indicated as being a trademark (typically by using 'TM'), though of course you do get extra rights if you do. The US Patent Office is a good resource for info: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp
Luc 15y ago
That bird design is to Rovio what Mickey is to Disney...