5 ms·

Just change your mobile UI from being a carbon copy to something original? They even copied the names of the filters. A cease and desist seems justified.

Kye 4y ago
[flagged]
- dannyw 4y ago
  It's absurd to think a highly technical case around fair use for API compatibility would bear any sort of relevance here.
- nulbyte 4y ago
  After reading the albeit messy thread, no, it seems the names of the filters are the issue. They are trademarked. So the developer prepended them with the letter 'i' two hours ago. I'm not sure the developer understands the issue properly. You can't use someone else's trademarks in your competing product as if they were your own marks.
  - Kye 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - theCrowing 4y ago
      How do you know if he's not a lawyer? You are dashing out assumptions left and right and are criticizing others for it. And yes, they have trademarks and patents for part of their UI and product names. You can easily check them out by using the uspto website.
      - Kye 4y ago
        >> "How do you know if he's not a lawyer?" I checked first. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Anulbyte%20%22not%20a%20lawyer%22&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... >> "You can easily check them out by using the uspto website." I actually couldn't! I looked as best as I could. Their search engine is horrible. Maybe you could offer a link rather than make uncharitable assumptions. edit: >> "No, I am not your servant." Asking you to show your work is not asking you to be a servant. edit: since HN won't let me reply anymore (rate limit) >> "What work? I told you how to look up trademarks and patents. I can do it again: If you want to look up trademarks and patents you can use the search function on the uspto website." As I said: I did. Nothing came up that had anything to do with these filters. Feel free to keep arguing with phantoms here. I'm moving on since you clearly aren't paying attention.
        theCrowing 4y ago
        No, I am not your servant. What work? I told you how to look up trademarks and patents. I can do it again: If you want to look up trademarks and patents you can use the search function on the uspto website. You are the one who is desperately trying to make a point without putting any work into it despite, as seen in the other comments in this thread and on mastodon, that the problem we are discussing is exactly the problem they face. lmao
    - jjulius 4y ago
      >You're way more confident than I was in my comment, and I don't think you can justify it. I don't get this reaction. They're not aggressively disagreeing with you or belittling you, they just seem confident in their view of the situation. It's OK to disagree.
  - subpixel 4y ago
    Pixelfed: just remove filters. They’re a relic of a time when phone cameras were basic.
  - antiterra 4y ago
    I’d like to introduce Hacker News to my new mobile device, the iiPhone! I’m sure Apple will leave me alone, because the name is different.
    - Kye 4y ago
      Cisco actually sued Apple over this. They settled.
      - antiterra 4y ago
        I’m sure I could afford that!
      - ec109685 4y ago
        Not exactly. Cisco had a product called the iPhone (versus suing because they had a product called Phone that Apple added i in front of)
    - andrewshadura 4y ago
      Coming up next: iiiPhone, ivPhone, vPhone, etc.
- mminer237 4y ago
  Google prevailed under fair use because they found the API names are organizational, Google only copied a minimal 0.4% of the Java codebase, and Android is not a directly replacement for Java generally. That's a pretty inapplicable decision here. This is almost exactly the same facts as Lotus v. Borland though, which the Supreme Court failed to make a decision on. So all we really know is that the First Circuit thinks it's allowed, but we have no idea how the Supreme Court would rule.
  - sangnoir 4y ago
    Even if we're charitable to Pixelfed: Google could afford to take the case all the way up to the Supreme Court. Can Pixelfed? They should just rename the filter names. The developer's immature antics make the project look unprepared for large scale adoption that the Fediverse seems to be on the cusp of. Donations to a defense fund will be going to waste.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Kye 4y ago

[flagged]

dannyw 4y ago
It's absurd to think a highly technical case around fair use for API compatibility would bear any sort of relevance here.
nulbyte 4y ago
After reading the albeit messy thread, no, it seems the names of the filters are the issue. They are trademarked. So the developer prepended them with the letter 'i' two hours ago. I'm not sure the developer understands the issue properly. You can't use someone else's trademarks in your competing product as if they were your own marks.
- Kye 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - theCrowing 4y ago
    How do you know if he's not a lawyer? You are dashing out assumptions left and right and are criticizing others for it. And yes, they have trademarks and patents for part of their UI and product names. You can easily check them out by using the uspto website.
    - Kye 4y ago
      >> "How do you know if he's not a lawyer?" I checked first. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Anulbyte%20%22not%20a%20lawyer%22&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... >> "You can easily check them out by using the uspto website." I actually couldn't! I looked as best as I could. Their search engine is horrible. Maybe you could offer a link rather than make uncharitable assumptions. edit: >> "No, I am not your servant." Asking you to show your work is not asking you to be a servant. edit: since HN won't let me reply anymore (rate limit) >> "What work? I told you how to look up trademarks and patents. I can do it again: If you want to look up trademarks and patents you can use the search function on the uspto website." As I said: I did. Nothing came up that had anything to do with these filters. Feel free to keep arguing with phantoms here. I'm moving on since you clearly aren't paying attention.
      - theCrowing 4y ago
        No, I am not your servant. What work? I told you how to look up trademarks and patents. I can do it again: If you want to look up trademarks and patents you can use the search function on the uspto website. You are the one who is desperately trying to make a point without putting any work into it despite, as seen in the other comments in this thread and on mastodon, that the problem we are discussing is exactly the problem they face. lmao
  - jjulius 4y ago
    >You're way more confident than I was in my comment, and I don't think you can justify it. I don't get this reaction. They're not aggressively disagreeing with you or belittling you, they just seem confident in their view of the situation. It's OK to disagree.
- subpixel 4y ago
  Pixelfed: just remove filters. They’re a relic of a time when phone cameras were basic.
- antiterra 4y ago
  I’d like to introduce Hacker News to my new mobile device, the iiPhone! I’m sure Apple will leave me alone, because the name is different.
  - Kye 4y ago
    Cisco actually sued Apple over this. They settled.
    - antiterra 4y ago
      I’m sure I could afford that!
    - ec109685 4y ago
      Not exactly. Cisco had a product called the iPhone (versus suing because they had a product called Phone that Apple added i in front of)
  - andrewshadura 4y ago
    Coming up next: iiiPhone, ivPhone, vPhone, etc.
mminer237 4y ago
Google prevailed under fair use because they found the API names are organizational, Google only copied a minimal 0.4% of the Java codebase, and Android is not a directly replacement for Java generally. That's a pretty inapplicable decision here. This is almost exactly the same facts as Lotus v. Borland though, which the Supreme Court failed to make a decision on. So all we really know is that the First Circuit thinks it's allowed, but we have no idea how the Supreme Court would rule.
- sangnoir 4y ago
  Even if we're charitable to Pixelfed: Google could afford to take the case all the way up to the Supreme Court. Can Pixelfed? They should just rename the filter names. The developer's immature antics make the project look unprepared for large scale adoption that the Fediverse seems to be on the cusp of. Donations to a defense fund will be going to waste.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]