3 ms·

"We’ve been the subject of no little scorn for our actions on this front, but the truth is that there is nothing very unusual about trademarking a common word f

"We’ve been the subject of no little scorn for our actions on this front, but the truth is that there is nothing very unusual about trademarking a common word for specific uses. Think of “Time”, “Money” “Fortune”, “Apple”, and “Sun”, to name a few." Are any of those words trademarked wrt the title of a computer game? Isn't this analogous to trademarking words within song, film, or book titles?

officemonkey 13y ago
Bethesda trademarked "Scrolls" (as in "The Elder Scrolls.") Most people thought that was overreaching too.
chilldream 13y ago
I think a better analogy might be if Fortune magazine tried to claim that because of their (valid) claim to the name "Fortune", no one should be able to start a magazine whose title starts with the letter "F".
- VLM 13y ago
  Your analogy is good, but an even better one would be no one should be able to start a magazine who's title is "Bitcoin Fortune", your guide to financial news in the new online economy, or something like that. You could even imagine the front cover of the infringing magazine, a tiny little BTC at the very top and the standard "FORTUNE" right underneath along the top of the magazine, just like the real magazine.
logfromblammo 13y ago
Titles of standalone literary works are generally not trademarkable. You need to have a series (Harry Potter) or significant commercial tie-ins (Spaceballs: The Lunchbox) to pull it off. King's "Saga" games do not appear to be a series so much as an attempt at a branding umbrella. That's much weaker than "Elder Scrolls", which is a series with common elements. Just "Scrolls" by itself is a long stretch, as the company did not produce other series with that word in it, like perhaps "Younger Scrolls" or "Forbidden Scrolls" or anything other than "Elder Scrolls", so confusion with "Magnetic Scrolls" was very unlikely. Again, as software falls largely under copyright, I don't think King has a leg to stand on from legal tradition. But our courts don't necessarily do what we think they should, either.

officemonkey 13y ago

Bethesda trademarked "Scrolls" (as in "The Elder Scrolls.") Most people thought that was overreaching too.

chilldream 13y ago

I think a better analogy might be if Fortune magazine tried to claim that because of their (valid) claim to the name "Fortune", no one should be able to start a magazine whose title starts with the letter "F".

VLM 13y ago
Your analogy is good, but an even better one would be no one should be able to start a magazine who's title is "Bitcoin Fortune", your guide to financial news in the new online economy, or something like that. You could even imagine the front cover of the infringing magazine, a tiny little BTC at the very top and the standard "FORTUNE" right underneath along the top of the magazine, just like the real magazine.

logfromblammo 13y ago

Titles of standalone literary works are generally not trademarkable. You need to have a series (Harry Potter) or significant commercial tie-ins (Spaceballs: The Lunchbox) to pull it off. King's "Saga" games do not appear to be a series so much as an attempt at a branding umbrella. That's much weaker than "Elder Scrolls", which is a series with common elements. Just "Scrolls" by itself is a long stretch, as the company did not produce other series with that word in it, like perhaps "Younger Scrolls" or "Forbidden Scrolls" or anything other than "Elder Scrolls", so confusion with "Magnetic Scrolls" was very unlikely. Again, as software falls largely under copyright, I don't think King has a leg to stand on from legal tradition. But our courts don't necessarily do what we think they should, either.