4 ms·

> is that really so ridiculous? Using the heavy hand of the state to threaten violence against people who make a particular tone... yes that is really so ridi

by jMyles 2y ago

> is that really so ridiculous? Using the heavy hand of the state to threaten violence against people who make a particular tone... yes that is really so ridiculous. The tone is question is quite close to G2. So, if your guitar is slightly sharp, you'll be making this tone when playing one of the most common chords.

borski 2y ago
Nobody is threatening violence against you for playing your guitar sharp. I have no idea where violence even came into play here. It’s a registered trademark. A registered trademark is a legal designation that provides exclusive rights to a brand name, logo, or other distinctive symbol used to identify a specific product or service; they registered Spice Sound or whatever as a trademark. They did not patent 100Hz. You would only be liable if you walked around playing your sharp guitar with a sign that said “Get your Spice Sound here” heh I’m not defending it, and it reminds me of that woman in Baltimore who pissed everyone off by trademarking “Hon”, causing the whole city to revolt against her. But it’s far from “threatening violence,” and they’re not patenting the sound.
- nkrisc 2y ago
  > Nobody is threatening violence against you for playing your guitar sharp. I have no idea where violence even came into play here. It’s a registered trademark. A registered trademark is a legal designation that provides exclusive rights to a brand name, logo, or other distinctive symbol used to identify a specific product or service; they registered Spice Sound or whatever as a trademark. And what happens to you if you don’t abide by the legal protections of the trademark? The government must ultimately use violence or the threat of violence to enforce its rules.
  - Angostura 2y ago
    That’s not how audio trademarks work. A sound trademark can represent a product (think Intel jiggle, MGM lion roar) but it can’t be the product. So in this case I suppose they might be able to Trademark ’Antivomotone’ as a word mark to describe the tone, but no-one is going to be able to trademark the tone itself.

by jMyles 2y ago

borski 2y ago

Nobody is threatening violence against you for playing your guitar sharp. I have no idea where violence even came into play here. It’s a registered trademark. A registered trademark is a legal designation that provides exclusive rights to a brand name, logo, or other distinctive symbol used to identify a specific product or service; they registered Spice Sound or whatever as a trademark. They did not patent 100Hz. You would only be liable if you walked around playing your sharp guitar with a sign that said “Get your Spice Sound here” heh I’m not defending it, and it reminds me of that woman in Baltimore who pissed everyone off by trademarking “Hon”, causing the whole city to revolt against her. But it’s far from “threatening violence,” and they’re not patenting the sound.

nkrisc 2y ago
> Nobody is threatening violence against you for playing your guitar sharp. I have no idea where violence even came into play here. It’s a registered trademark. A registered trademark is a legal designation that provides exclusive rights to a brand name, logo, or other distinctive symbol used to identify a specific product or service; they registered Spice Sound or whatever as a trademark. And what happens to you if you don’t abide by the legal protections of the trademark? The government must ultimately use violence or the threat of violence to enforce its rules.
- Angostura 2y ago
  That’s not how audio trademarks work. A sound trademark can represent a product (think Intel jiggle, MGM lion roar) but it can’t be the product. So in this case I suppose they might be able to Trademark ’Antivomotone’ as a word mark to describe the tone, but no-one is going to be able to trademark the tone itself.