5 ms·

2030: Splunk Inc and Meta are back in court today. Splunk Inc is being sued by Meta of the term "metadata" in their product which Meta says violates their trade

2030: Splunk Inc and Meta are back in court today. Splunk Inc is being sued by Meta of the term "metadata" in their product which Meta says violates their trademark. 2031: Meta sued a group of Forza Horizon 5 players today, arguing the group infringed on their trademark when they used the term "Meta Build" in a livestream.

unyttigfjelltol 4y ago
It's more like Apple suing an orchard for using the same word in their name... which demonstrates the real issue here is that Monster Beverages chose a word that is merely descriptive in an industry adjacent to their own market. Not an expert but maybe they would be better off making the scope of their market clearer rather than tilting at virtual monsters.
- AlbertCory 4y ago
  Apple did have to get a waiver from Apple Records in England, IiRC, which predated them by almost a decade.
  - kmeisthax 4y ago
    It's important to note that this wasn't a waiver, this was multiple settlement agreements. Apple Corps sued Apple Computer at least four times: - First in 1978, for merely being called Apple. They settled with an agreement to not enter into each other's businesses. - Second, in 1986. Apple Computer put sound chips and MIDI ports into the Apple IIGS. Apple Corps sues claiming violation of the settlement agreement, because apparently just being able to play music makes it a trademark violation now. - Third, in 1991. Apple Corps buys a new Macintosh and notices one of the system sounds is called Sosumi[0]. So they do. The settlement agreement now basically just prohibits Apple Computer from selling physical music. - Fourth, in 2003. Apple Computer opens a digital music store. Apple Corps sues despite the settlement agreement clearly stating they only have rights to sell physical music with the Apple branding. They lose. [0] Pronounced "So Sue Me"
    - AlbertCory 4y ago
      I knew when I said IIRC that I probably did not remember correctly. It was only the 1978 settlement that stuck in my head.
wrycoder 4y ago
Well, Microsoft successfully established "Windows" as a trademark, even though the term "window" was commonly used in graphical interface documentation for many years prior to their arrogating it. Not "Microsoft Windows", but just "Windows". Disgraceful.

unyttigfjelltol 4y ago

It's more like Apple suing an orchard for using the same word in their name... which demonstrates the real issue here is that Monster Beverages chose a word that is merely descriptive in an industry adjacent to their own market. Not an expert but maybe they would be better off making the scope of their market clearer rather than tilting at virtual monsters.

AlbertCory 4y ago
Apple did have to get a waiver from Apple Records in England, IiRC, which predated them by almost a decade.
- kmeisthax 4y ago
  It's important to note that this wasn't a waiver, this was multiple settlement agreements. Apple Corps sued Apple Computer at least four times: - First in 1978, for merely being called Apple. They settled with an agreement to not enter into each other's businesses. - Second, in 1986. Apple Computer put sound chips and MIDI ports into the Apple IIGS. Apple Corps sues claiming violation of the settlement agreement, because apparently just being able to play music makes it a trademark violation now. - Third, in 1991. Apple Corps buys a new Macintosh and notices one of the system sounds is called Sosumi[0]. So they do. The settlement agreement now basically just prohibits Apple Computer from selling physical music. - Fourth, in 2003. Apple Computer opens a digital music store. Apple Corps sues despite the settlement agreement clearly stating they only have rights to sell physical music with the Apple branding. They lose. [0] Pronounced "So Sue Me"
  - AlbertCory 4y ago
    I knew when I said IIRC that I probably did not remember correctly. It was only the 1978 settlement that stuck in my head.

wrycoder 4y ago

Well, Microsoft successfully established "Windows" as a trademark, even though the term "window" was commonly used in graphical interface documentation for many years prior to their arrogating it. Not "Microsoft Windows", but just "Windows". Disgraceful.