4 ms·

I would argue that for something to be trademarked it must somehow be recorded. A vague description is not enough. For a color such as Ferrari Red, we have sp

I would argue that for something to be trademarked it must somehow be recorded. A vague description is not enough. For a color such as Ferrari Red, we have specific values. For a sound such the windows noises, we have exact recording. If I were a judge, I would need more than "it smells like vanilla" before enforcing a trademark against someone with an allegedly similarly-smelling product. At least run the scent through a mass spectrometer or something. Are we going to have vineyards suing each other because X wine smells too similar to Y?

meowster 2y ago
Can't smells be recorded by chemical composition? 20+ years ago, CSI (U.S. TV Show) had an episode where they used a device to identify fragrances; seemed plausible to me.
- RIMR 2y ago
  CSI is notorious for inventing lots of forensic tools that never have and never will exist. In fact, their portrayal of forensic science has warped public perception enough that it has led to the corruption of actual forensic science, because people find it extremely easy to believe that all of these magical investigative tools actually exist. A show about actual investigative science would not be exciting to watch though, so they throw shit in like "freeze and enhance" because people love fantasy science. They just don't know enough to know the difference between what's real and what's not. In the real world, we do have something called an "Electronic Nose", which is essentially what you are describing here. But, if you're actually trying to document the composition of a fragrance, you wouldn't work backwards by analyzing the smell, you would just document the formula you used to create the fragrance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_nose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_nose
  - meowster 2y ago
    Ah yes, the "CSI Effect", I forgot about that. Thank you.
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  Probably, but couldn't there exist a situation where another set of chemicals produced a similar sensation?
  - fuzzfactor 2y ago
    There's a starup working on producng a wide variety of odors from a more limited number of ingredients. Using AI, "naturally".
- bregma 2y ago
  Let me guess. The start the machine, say the magic incantation "Zoom. Enhance." and the answer pops up in an animated sequence on a 72-inch high-def television screen after showing a brief animation of some kind of chemical process complete with flashing outlines and sound effects.
  - meowster 2y ago
    No.
xanderlewis 2y ago
You say Ferrari Red is described in terms of ‘specific values’, but ultimately it’s still just a description. Who defines what the values mean? I actually don’t know. Does each set of values (in whatever colour system you’re talking about) correspond to a list of quantities of specific physical dyes?
- eichin 2y ago
  I went to dig into this a bit (since the obvious way to find out what is trademarked is to read the filing) but the euro trademark viewer fails to load for me in the US; a bit more digging suggests that not only is it not trademarked, but for a bunch of time they were driving Marlboro Red cars instead anyway, as part of a branding deal. So, anyone have leads on any actual evidence here?
- sandworm101 2y ago
  >> correspond to a list of quantities of specific physical dyes? No. A trademark is not a recipe. What matters is the actual look. As for values, "Ferrari Red" is has defined RGB values according to colorhexa (RGB: (239, 26, 45), CMYK: (0, 89, 81, 6).0) and I am sure is outlined in any contract involving Ferrari sponsorship. No doubt Coke also has very specific values for its version of "red".
  - xanderlewis 2y ago
    But if it’s specified in terms of CMYK, that is a list of quantities of specific dyes, isn’t it?
    - kube-system 2y ago
      CMYK is a representation ratios of unspecific dyes, on an unknown medium.
      - xanderlewis 2y ago
        Ah — true. I thought the dyes used for each colour would be fairly standard, though.
brookst 2y ago
IP works differently than code, and it is often subjective. See: copyright infringement. > Are we going to have vineyards suing each other because X wine smells too similar to Y? No, because the smell of (most) wines is not trademarkable, being a function of the product. Trademarking scents is difficult[1]. Attempts to quantify scent trademarks / music copyrights are doomed to fail. Partly because every person experiences these sensory inputs differently. Two smells could be very different chemically yet indistinguishable to real people. 1. https://www.orlaw.com/intellectual-property/yes-can-trademark-smells-not-easy/ https://www.orlaw.com/intellectual-property/yes-can-trademar...
kube-system 2y ago
Aside from the separate conversation about the validity of a scent trademark --- trademarks have very different purposes for existing than a copyright or a patent. The point of a trademark is to protect consumers from being confused in the marketplace. You can violate trademark without copying a mark exactly. You can also copy a mark exactly and be completely justified in your usage. Extreme precision in defining the mark isn't totally necessary.

meowster 2y ago

Can't smells be recorded by chemical composition? 20+ years ago, CSI (U.S. TV Show) had an episode where they used a device to identify fragrances; seemed plausible to me.

RIMR 2y ago
CSI is notorious for inventing lots of forensic tools that never have and never will exist. In fact, their portrayal of forensic science has warped public perception enough that it has led to the corruption of actual forensic science, because people find it extremely easy to believe that all of these magical investigative tools actually exist. A show about actual investigative science would not be exciting to watch though, so they throw shit in like "freeze and enhance" because people love fantasy science. They just don't know enough to know the difference between what's real and what's not. In the real world, we do have something called an "Electronic Nose", which is essentially what you are describing here. But, if you're actually trying to document the composition of a fragrance, you wouldn't work backwards by analyzing the smell, you would just document the formula you used to create the fragrance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_nose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_nose
- meowster 2y ago
  Ah yes, the "CSI Effect", I forgot about that. Thank you.
actionfromafar 2y ago
Probably, but couldn't there exist a situation where another set of chemicals produced a similar sensation?
- fuzzfactor 2y ago
  There's a starup working on producng a wide variety of odors from a more limited number of ingredients. Using AI, "naturally".
bregma 2y ago
Let me guess. The start the machine, say the magic incantation "Zoom. Enhance." and the answer pops up in an animated sequence on a 72-inch high-def television screen after showing a brief animation of some kind of chemical process complete with flashing outlines and sound effects.
- meowster 2y ago
  No.

xanderlewis 2y ago

You say Ferrari Red is described in terms of ‘specific values’, but ultimately it’s still just a description. Who defines what the values mean? I actually don’t know. Does each set of values (in whatever colour system you’re talking about) correspond to a list of quantities of specific physical dyes?

eichin 2y ago
I went to dig into this a bit (since the obvious way to find out what is trademarked is to read the filing) but the euro trademark viewer fails to load for me in the US; a bit more digging suggests that not only is it not trademarked, but for a bunch of time they were driving Marlboro Red cars instead anyway, as part of a branding deal. So, anyone have leads on any actual evidence here?
sandworm101 2y ago
>> correspond to a list of quantities of specific physical dyes? No. A trademark is not a recipe. What matters is the actual look. As for values, "Ferrari Red" is has defined RGB values according to colorhexa (RGB: (239, 26, 45), CMYK: (0, 89, 81, 6).0) and I am sure is outlined in any contract involving Ferrari sponsorship. No doubt Coke also has very specific values for its version of "red".
- xanderlewis 2y ago
  But if it’s specified in terms of CMYK, that is a list of quantities of specific dyes, isn’t it?
  - kube-system 2y ago
    CMYK is a representation ratios of unspecific dyes, on an unknown medium.
    - xanderlewis 2y ago
      Ah — true. I thought the dyes used for each colour would be fairly standard, though.

brookst 2y ago

IP works differently than code, and it is often subjective. See: copyright infringement. > Are we going to have vineyards suing each other because X wine smells too similar to Y? No, because the smell of (most) wines is not trademarkable, being a function of the product. Trademarking scents is difficult[1]. Attempts to quantify scent trademarks / music copyrights are doomed to fail. Partly because every person experiences these sensory inputs differently. Two smells could be very different chemically yet indistinguishable to real people. 1. https://www.orlaw.com/intellectual-property/yes-can-trademark-smells-not-easy/ https://www.orlaw.com/intellectual-property/yes-can-trademar...

kube-system 2y ago

Aside from the separate conversation about the validity of a scent trademark --- trademarks have very different purposes for existing than a copyright or a patent. The point of a trademark is to protect consumers from being confused in the marketplace. You can violate trademark without copying a mark exactly. You can also copy a mark exactly and be completely justified in your usage. Extreme precision in defining the mark isn't totally necessary.