6 ms·
I think the "single letter" part is important here. AFAIK trademarks can't be too simple and generic. Sort of like how Intel couldn't trademark 286/386/486, s
by wolrah 3y ago
I think the "single letter" part is important here. AFAIK trademarks can't be too simple and generic. Sort of like how Intel couldn't trademark 286/386/486, so instead of 586 we got Pentium.
- throwaway09223 3y agoNo, it's not important. It's just wrong, as clearly illustrated by the article we're all discussing. Microsoft applied for, and obtained, a trademark for "x". Companies do this all the time. Companies also trademark numbers all the time. Dale Earnhardt trademarked the number "1": https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=75439039&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=75439039&caseType=SERIAL_... Intel lost their trademark battle because they didn't attempt to register the trademark until the 486 - more than a decade after the numbers were in common use by other chip manufactures. It has nothing to do with whether the mark is simple.
- nashashmi 3y agoAre you sure it is the letter and not the graphic that is trademarked?
- zimpenfish 3y agoIt does say "Standard Character Claim: No" which (as best I can tell from [1]) means it is the particular form of that letter[2], not the letter itself, which is trademarked. [1] https://smallbusiness.chron.com/standard-character-claim-mean-trademark-59226.html https://smallbusiness.chron.com/standard-character-claim-mea... [2] Although it is a pretty generic "1".
- TehCorwiz 3y agoThe specimen on that application are clearly more than just the numeral ‘1’. There’s obviously design there. This does not appear to be equivalent.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- sokoloff 3y agoI thought that Peugeot had a trademark on car models of the form X0Y (where X and Y were single digits), resulting in the Porsche 901 being renamed to the 911 that we now know.
- Kuinox 3y agoApple trademark the word Apple.