15 ms·

A Conference Stole My Identity

237 points by jballanc 12y ago

stefanve 12y ago
To me the most bizarre (and possible only) thing is that twitter suspended your twitter account instead of second coming of FS
- Xorlev 12y ago
  Once he used the logo he was in the wrong.
  - donretag 12y ago
    Parody is allowed under US law.
    - brubaker 12y ago
      Parody is a defense once you have been sued.
    - andrewryno 12y ago
      Right, but you can't use their logo, you need to specify it's a parody, etc. See: https://support.twitter.com/articles/106373-parody-commentary-and-fan-account-policy https://support.twitter.com/articles/106373-parody-commentar...
    - ubernostrum 12y ago
      Sure, parody is allowed under US law. But is it allowed under Twitter's terms of service? And to what extent? Because when you play in their sandbox, you play by their rules.
  - Dylan16807 12y ago
    {FU isn't really a logo, though. It's not even in the same font. Also brubaker you're hellbanned and I can't figure out why.
  - lotsofmangos 12y ago
    He didn't use their logo, he made a satire on the logo to comment on the situation. You can't be passing off if you are doing commentary.
    - muddylemon 12y ago
      He specifically said he did it in order to gain twitter followers from those confused by the relationship between him and the conference.
tedchs 12y ago
Or maybe, you know, nobody knew about this guy's sense of the string "futurestack" and New Relic's marketing people brainstormed for a good conference name (increasingly difficult) and just went with it. You do not have exclusive, global, all-contextual moral rights to the string you happened to choose as your usual internet handle.
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  > You do not have exclusive, global, all-contextual moral rights to the string you happened to choose as your usual internet handle. Unless you've trademarked it, which you should probably due to prevent people who are terrible at their marketing job from absconding with something you value. A trademark application is something like $275.
  - Dylan16807 12y ago
    Trademarks are heavily contextual, so still nope.
    - paulgb 12y ago
      Especially when they're made up of two common English words.
    - toomuchtodo 12y ago
      Are you kidding me? It's in the same damn market/space! Its not like someone is promoting Futurestack bouncy houses or lawn furniture.
      - Dylan16807 12y ago
        The same damn market/space as conferences? That's quite a stretch, no matter what the conference is about.
        67726e 12y ago
jayvanguard 12y ago
This is a weird case. I can see why he is pissed but you don't have global rights to your name let alone your internet handle. Ask anyone who suddenly finds themselves with the same name as a famous person. Google-slapped! Should the company have considered this? It is a toss up. If a lone person using an internet handle is the bar to avoid any naming conflicts you're pretty much screwed in coming up with a name for anything.
- spinlock 12y ago
  So, you're saying this guy's the new Michael Bolton?
simi_ 12y ago
Account suspended – lol. https://twitter.com/futurestack https://twitter.com/futurestack
blackdogie 12y ago
Unless you have a relevant trademark, there isn't really much you can do here. He doesn't really have any claim to exclusive rights to this particular mix of words.
- regularfry 12y ago
  You don't need to formally lodge a trademark application to gain protection. At least, not under UK law. I imagine it's similar in the US. Not only that, but he can clearly demonstrate both confusion and priority, in the same field. I don't think it's particularly clear-cut which way a judge would go.
  - jamesbritt 12y ago
    In the US there is common-law trademark protection http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/common.html http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/common.html It is not as strong as have a federally-registered trademark. But, as others have pointed out, the problem is in showing the likelihood of confusion. It's _possible_ that this musician could prove this, but I believe it can be quite expensive, and there's no assurance of winning. My gut feeling is the the idea of confusion is not so clear cut. If you apply for a trademark you need to specify the specific field of application, and there are quite a few and remarkably segmented. Even having a registered trademark as a musician may not stop another from getting a trademark on a tech conference. His best bet might have been to try to ride the wave of inadvertent attention, promoting his stuff to people on Twitter who followed him by mistake. Perhaps some number of them would have become fans/customers. But I can understand the anger when you think someone is stepping on your identity.
    - regularfry 12y ago
      He calls himself "an independent artist and programmer." If he's been paid for the latter under the futurestack name...
      - jamesbritt 12y ago
TheMagicHorsey 12y ago
This guy completely misunderstands how intellectual property around brands and names works. Copyright doesn't protect your brand name. Trademark does. Trademark doesn't give you blanket protection that stops every other person on earth from using your trademarked term. What you get instead is a highly context-specific protection. A trademark protects the use of your trademarked term in a specific service/goods segment. When you see trademarks like Ford, Apple, or Google, that seem to have unbelievably wide protection for their trademarks, that seems to span across wide spans of the market, that is because their brands are very well known, and because the use of their brand by a third-party could create a confusion in the consumer as to the origin of the goods/services. If there is no confusion in the minds of consumers as to the origin of a message/good/service, then the use of a trademarked term is not restricted. In this case, this guy is virtually unknown. Not a single person thinks he is the one running this conference. Its clear the conference is being run by other people. You cannot claim an absolute property right to a silly sequence of words just because you think you said it first, and because you made a domain. Yes, the domain and the twitter handle should be yours by right of first occupation. But nothing more. edit: changed "absolute nobody" to "virtually unknown" to address rudeness concerns. edit: with regards to the charge of rudeness leveled against the conference organizers: In a world literally flooded by brands and names, name collision is not rudeness, it is almost inevitable.
- erikschoster 12y ago
  "In this case, this guy is an absolute nobody." He's an artist and musician who seems to be actively performing in the chiptune / computer music worlds. Even if he wasn't, there's no need for name calling.
  - TodPunk 12y ago
    I don't think 'nobody' is name-calling. It's accurately, if not tactfully, describing a status of fame and recognition. He is not famous at all, and regardless of what we may or may not like about chiptunes and electronica, it is a niche market for people. His response to the confusion (which admittedly is frustrating and annoying) is simply confirmation of this lack in status. How much frustrating interaction on social platforms does your average minor celebrity (internet or otherwise) deal with? How do they respond, or do they even respond at all? We are what we are by the actions we take. Reactive actions are still actions, and they stand alone at the end of the day. If you react to negativity with more negativity, that's telling of you, not the negativity that fed that action. It's human to lash out, but it's also human to choose not to do so.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
null_ptr 12y ago
Good unique handles are only getting scarcer as the internet grows older. I wonder what people will do 20 years from now.
- richmarr 12y ago
  Use different websites.
damon_c 12y ago
It's not easy to stop an identity campaign once it's been started but it really seems like the conference people at least tried a little bit with their fs14 and "{future}stack" branding.
Practicality 12y ago
Have we considered that the reason for the account suspension is likely because the logo is FU?
knd775 12y ago
I really hope his account gets unsuspended... That is rather ridiculous. No one checked his account age before dropping the ban hammer?
mgcross 12y ago
If I were in this situation, I'd probably try to sell them the domain for a fair price (>$10k), go on vacation with part of the money, and use the rest for a rebrand when I got home.
- dreamfactory2 12y ago
  He needs to apply for trademark and let them come to his lawyer with precisely that kind of offer
morgo 12y ago
I also use the same handle as a conference. Me: @morgo Conference: @morgo_nz I impersonated them with flight of the conchords jokes in 2011: https://twitter.com/morgo/status/128488872165384195 https://twitter.com/morgo/status/128488872165384195 Immature on my part. Very happy not to have my twitter account suspended :)
Glyptodon 12y ago
What sucks is that eventually lots of people will assume he stole the name he uses from the conference...
logfromblammo 12y ago
You don't actually have to register your trademark with anyone. You just have to use it and defend it like a badger sow in front of a litter of pups. Nowadays, that effectively means putting an IP lawyer on retainer and subscribing to a brand monitoring service. Any one of those worth their salt will advise you to register your trademark, simply because it makes their job easier if anyone attempts to infringe. The net result is that it is only worthwhile to pay for the maintenance and upkeep of a trademark if it is actually making you money. Individuals and smaller entities should instead rely primarily upon their own names, to build up reputations and personal relationships using trade dress that can more easily be enforced by the secretary of state's business records and management staff. Impersonation of someone else's actual identity can prompt criminal prosecution, rather than a more difficult civil suit. This guy at futurestack does not quite grasp the legal concepts involved. Based on actual usage, he could make a case for a trademark over journals and periodical publications. If he found a newspaper or magazine calling itself futurestack, he could force them to change their name. As we know from frequent patent industry complaining, adding "on the Internet" to a thing does not make it a different thing. Blogs are categorically the same as newspapers. A trade conference is not a newspaper. It does not matter who attends. A trade conference for plumbers and steamfitters is categorically the same as a conference for web developers, or one for science fiction authors, or one for sasquatch hunters. There is no confusion between the actual things. No one arrives at the conference and says, "Hey, where are all the blog posts?". And no one visits the blog and says, "So where do I pick up my name tag?". So the instant he decided to impersonate the conference with his own web presence, he was infringing upon their trademark. Bad idea. They have more money and more supporters. He needs to back away immediately, apologize, and attempt to create some measure of cooperation. It couldn't hurt to add a disambiguation header to the blog that redirects accidental conference-related visitors to where they actually wanted to go.
trjordan 12y ago
"Lew Cirne" anagrams to "New Relic". "Future Stack" anagrams to "Astute Fucker". I think the folks at New Relic just have a thing for anagrams.
peterkelly 12y ago
and that's... why you always register a trademark
- pyre 12y ago
  Even if you register a trademark, it doesn't give a claim to the name that blankets the entire world, and every industry out there.
mcguire 12y ago
My name is Tommy McGuire. I am unaffiliated with Maj. Thomas B. McGuire[1] or McGuire Air Force Base[2] or any of the other people on the internet who may or may not use the name "mcguire" or "T. McGuire" or anything similar. Tl;dr: This is the world's smallest violin, playing "My heart bleeds for thee." [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_McGuire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_McGuire [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGuire_Air_Force_Base http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGuire_Air_Force_Base
Benjamin_Dobell 12y ago
So it turns out there are a lot of people in the world. Name clashes happen... all.. the... time! If you're that pedantic about a pseudonym, get a trademark. A mate of mine just 2 days ago had a 12 year old bug him on twitter to sell his twitter handle for $12. The kid has a terrible YouTube channel under the same name with plenty of videos 'tea-bagging' people in computer games and just generally being incredibly obnoxious. You know what my friend did?... laughed.
newrelic 12y ago
You don't own the name unless you file for a trademark, feel free to sue if you think otherwise.
- jdong 12y ago
  I wonder if this is the official stance of new relic.
  - jasonlotito 12y ago
    Why would you wonder this?
- endersshadow 12y ago
  Assuming this is a joke account, but that's not how trademarks work. In fact, it's so far from how trademarks work that whoever made this account should be ashamed at how ignorant they are.
- cpmsmith 12y ago
  user: newrelic created: 53 minutes ago Seems less than official.
- supermatt 12y ago
  Think you need to read up on commonlaw trademarks. You don't need to register a trademark for it to be "owned".
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
ErikRogneby 12y ago
I wonder if @mentions on twitter meet the "substantial likelihood of confusion" test for trademark infringement?
kordless 12y ago
It's hysterical that the Pirate Hoover Shirt™ is at the top of the post and then at the bottom he was angry because someone offered him the shirt to try to make him feel better. I mean, what could be better than being offered The Best T-Shirt Ever Designed? (I was in the room when we came up with the shirt design, and I can tell you it was a happy time.) Sadly, that just pissed him off even more, which is a sign something is wrong somewhere with something. > a narcissist [1] [1] http://futurestack.com/static/about/ http://futurestack.com/static/about/
- Anderkent 12y ago
  Really hard to tell whether you're being sarcastic in: > what could be better than being offered The Best T-Shirt Ever Designed? (I was in the room when we came up with the shirt design, and I can tell you it was a happy time. I'd guess you were, but the parenthesed mention seems to go against that?
  - kordless 12y ago
    No sarcasm. The Loggly Hoover shirts are loved by their owners. I'm biased because I invented Hoover (did not draw him however) but still, people love beavers and the funny shirts we did. I find it ironic that the guy was offended by being offered a shirt that basically takes nothing seriously and pretty much brings a smile to people's faces, and then puts it a the top of a rant post. BTW, I do appreciate his pain, I've had people steal my designs (and name to boot) before and it sucks.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- thefreeman 12y ago
  the account was registered 16 minutes ago something tells me its not official...
- newrelic 12y ago
  haha fuck you dude, I make more in a week than you make in an year.
  - pyre 12y ago
    Doesn't that just make you a target when The Revolution(tm) comes?
  - TheMagicHorsey 12y ago
    Clearly not affiliated with NewRelic, and trying to start shit on the Internet.
- eli 12y ago
  Don't feed the trolls...
- jasonlotito 12y ago
  > Classy move. Seriously, the only thing this does is make it clear someone is childishly trying to screw over a company by making them look bad. It really won't work here.
  - ColinWright 12y ago
    I was under no illusions that this new user was connected with "the real" New Relic. There is no evidence for that. My comments were directed at the person. I should've remembered that there are people who post this kind of thing just to screw around, and that no amount of engagement will turn them into someone of value. Yeah, I know, "Don't feed the trolls." Even on HN. I'll delete my comments, flag the inappropriate stuff, and move on.
socrates1998 12y ago
A lot of people are talking about how this guys doesn't understand Trademark law. Well, no shit. This conference stole his identity. He isn't claiming he has a right to the name. What the conference did was legal, but still not right. All too typical of people trying to build themselves up in status. They knew about this guy and they then they checked to see if he trademarked it. They knew they were legally okay, so they went ahead with it. Legal move, but a dick move.
- codemaster3000 12y ago
  Agreed. Not sure why the top post ITT is a rant about copyright law vs trademark laws. @futurestack never claimed legal rights to the name, he's just saying that what New Relic did was a total dick move.
- viggity 12y ago
  Agreed. In the word of "the dude" - "You're not wrong, Walter, you're just an asshole". Asshole is probably too harsh a word, but considering that "futurestack" was already taken as a domain and as a twitter account and both were in active use and related to technology, naming your conference "futurestack" seems a bit lame. Perhaps they could have done more to communicate what the official domain / twitter accounts were. (i.e. make them more prominent)
  - futurestack 12y ago
    First smile I've had all day.
- x1798DE 12y ago
  I don't really see it as a dick move. They're not appropriating this guy's brand or pretending to be him. The worst that's happened so far is he got a few tweets not meant for him. He's not going to lose any business or reputation because a conference has the same name as him. He already owns the .com domain and has the twitter account for the name. I could see if they tried to make some move to steal his domain by trying to vulture a lapsed renewal, or sent him a C&D for use of the name, but basically their big crime was to have chosen the same name for their developer conference as he uses as his internet handle, and maybe they knew there was some guy who uses the same name. Name collisions are going to happen. There are a limited number of cool names. If it's not causing any real problems, then I don't see the big issue. That said, if I accidentally caused some guy to get a bunch of tweets not meant for him, I'd probably apologize about it privately (obviously it wasn't intentional). I definitely would try to talk to the guy before trying to get his twitter account suspended.
codemaster3000 12y ago
Why was this removed from the front page?
- dogecoinbase 12y ago
  If I had to guess, the same reason New Relic was able to get him quickly and easily suspended from Twitter without any contact from Twitter to him (which is standard) -- Bay Area tech friends.
DarkIye 12y ago
Your hasty "this is a rant" cover does nothing to compensate for the fact that nobody cares.

237 points by jballanc 12y ago

To me the most bizarre (and possible only) thing is that twitter suspended your twitter account instead of second coming of FS

Xorlev 12y ago
Once he used the logo he was in the wrong.
- donretag 12y ago
  Parody is allowed under US law.
  - brubaker 12y ago
    Parody is a defense once you have been sued.
  - andrewryno 12y ago
    Right, but you can't use their logo, you need to specify it's a parody, etc. See: https://support.twitter.com/articles/106373-parody-commentary-and-fan-account-policy https://support.twitter.com/articles/106373-parody-commentar...
  - ubernostrum 12y ago
    Sure, parody is allowed under US law. But is it allowed under Twitter's terms of service? And to what extent? Because when you play in their sandbox, you play by their rules.
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  {FU isn't really a logo, though. It's not even in the same font. Also brubaker you're hellbanned and I can't figure out why.
- lotsofmangos 12y ago
  He didn't use their logo, he made a satire on the logo to comment on the situation. You can't be passing off if you are doing commentary.
  - muddylemon 12y ago
    He specifically said he did it in order to gain twitter followers from those confused by the relationship between him and the conference.

tedchs 12y ago

Or maybe, you know, nobody knew about this guy's sense of the string "futurestack" and New Relic's marketing people brainstormed for a good conference name (increasingly difficult) and just went with it. You do not have exclusive, global, all-contextual moral rights to the string you happened to choose as your usual internet handle.

toomuchtodo 12y ago
> You do not have exclusive, global, all-contextual moral rights to the string you happened to choose as your usual internet handle. Unless you've trademarked it, which you should probably due to prevent people who are terrible at their marketing job from absconding with something you value. A trademark application is something like $275.
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  Trademarks are heavily contextual, so still nope.
  - paulgb 12y ago
    Especially when they're made up of two common English words.
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    Are you kidding me? It's in the same damn market/space! Its not like someone is promoting Futurestack bouncy houses or lawn furniture.
    - Dylan16807 12y ago
      The same damn market/space as conferences? That's quite a stretch, no matter what the conference is about.
      - 67726e 12y ago

jayvanguard 12y ago

This is a weird case. I can see why he is pissed but you don't have global rights to your name let alone your internet handle. Ask anyone who suddenly finds themselves with the same name as a famous person. Google-slapped! Should the company have considered this? It is a toss up. If a lone person using an internet handle is the bar to avoid any naming conflicts you're pretty much screwed in coming up with a name for anything.

spinlock 12y ago
So, you're saying this guy's the new Michael Bolton?

simi_ 12y ago

Account suspended – lol. https://twitter.com/futurestack https://twitter.com/futurestack

blackdogie 12y ago

Unless you have a relevant trademark, there isn't really much you can do here. He doesn't really have any claim to exclusive rights to this particular mix of words.

regularfry 12y ago
You don't need to formally lodge a trademark application to gain protection. At least, not under UK law. I imagine it's similar in the US. Not only that, but he can clearly demonstrate both confusion and priority, in the same field. I don't think it's particularly clear-cut which way a judge would go.
- jamesbritt 12y ago
  In the US there is common-law trademark protection http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/common.html http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/common.html It is not as strong as have a federally-registered trademark. But, as others have pointed out, the problem is in showing the likelihood of confusion. It's _possible_ that this musician could prove this, but I believe it can be quite expensive, and there's no assurance of winning. My gut feeling is the the idea of confusion is not so clear cut. If you apply for a trademark you need to specify the specific field of application, and there are quite a few and remarkably segmented. Even having a registered trademark as a musician may not stop another from getting a trademark on a tech conference. His best bet might have been to try to ride the wave of inadvertent attention, promoting his stuff to people on Twitter who followed him by mistake. Perhaps some number of them would have become fans/customers. But I can understand the anger when you think someone is stepping on your identity.
  - regularfry 12y ago
    He calls himself "an independent artist and programmer." If he's been paid for the latter under the futurestack name...
    - jamesbritt 12y ago

TheMagicHorsey 12y ago

This guy completely misunderstands how intellectual property around brands and names works. Copyright doesn't protect your brand name. Trademark does. Trademark doesn't give you blanket protection that stops every other person on earth from using your trademarked term. What you get instead is a highly context-specific protection. A trademark protects the use of your trademarked term in a specific service/goods segment. When you see trademarks like Ford, Apple, or Google, that seem to have unbelievably wide protection for their trademarks, that seems to span across wide spans of the market, that is because their brands are very well known, and because the use of their brand by a third-party could create a confusion in the consumer as to the origin of the goods/services. If there is no confusion in the minds of consumers as to the origin of a message/good/service, then the use of a trademarked term is not restricted. In this case, this guy is virtually unknown. Not a single person thinks he is the one running this conference. Its clear the conference is being run by other people. You cannot claim an absolute property right to a silly sequence of words just because you think you said it first, and because you made a domain. Yes, the domain and the twitter handle should be yours by right of first occupation. But nothing more. edit: changed "absolute nobody" to "virtually unknown" to address rudeness concerns. edit: with regards to the charge of rudeness leveled against the conference organizers: In a world literally flooded by brands and names, name collision is not rudeness, it is almost inevitable.

erikschoster 12y ago
"In this case, this guy is an absolute nobody." He's an artist and musician who seems to be actively performing in the chiptune / computer music worlds. Even if he wasn't, there's no need for name calling.
- TodPunk 12y ago
  I don't think 'nobody' is name-calling. It's accurately, if not tactfully, describing a status of fame and recognition. He is not famous at all, and regardless of what we may or may not like about chiptunes and electronica, it is a niche market for people. His response to the confusion (which admittedly is frustrating and annoying) is simply confirmation of this lack in status. How much frustrating interaction on social platforms does your average minor celebrity (internet or otherwise) deal with? How do they respond, or do they even respond at all? We are what we are by the actions we take. Reactive actions are still actions, and they stand alone at the end of the day. If you react to negativity with more negativity, that's telling of you, not the negativity that fed that action. It's human to lash out, but it's also human to choose not to do so.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

null_ptr 12y ago

Good unique handles are only getting scarcer as the internet grows older. I wonder what people will do 20 years from now.

richmarr 12y ago
Use different websites.

damon_c 12y ago

It's not easy to stop an identity campaign once it's been started but it really seems like the conference people at least tried a little bit with their fs14 and "{future}stack" branding.

Practicality 12y ago

Have we considered that the reason for the account suspension is likely because the logo is FU?

knd775 12y ago

I really hope his account gets unsuspended... That is rather ridiculous. No one checked his account age before dropping the ban hammer?

mgcross 12y ago

If I were in this situation, I'd probably try to sell them the domain for a fair price (>$10k), go on vacation with part of the money, and use the rest for a rebrand when I got home.

dreamfactory2 12y ago
He needs to apply for trademark and let them come to his lawyer with precisely that kind of offer

morgo 12y ago

I also use the same handle as a conference. Me: @morgo Conference: @morgo_nz I impersonated them with flight of the conchords jokes in 2011: https://twitter.com/morgo/status/128488872165384195 https://twitter.com/morgo/status/128488872165384195 Immature on my part. Very happy not to have my twitter account suspended :)

Glyptodon 12y ago

What sucks is that eventually lots of people will assume he stole the name he uses from the conference...

logfromblammo 12y ago

You don't actually have to register your trademark with anyone. You just have to use it and defend it like a badger sow in front of a litter of pups. Nowadays, that effectively means putting an IP lawyer on retainer and subscribing to a brand monitoring service. Any one of those worth their salt will advise you to register your trademark, simply because it makes their job easier if anyone attempts to infringe. The net result is that it is only worthwhile to pay for the maintenance and upkeep of a trademark if it is actually making you money. Individuals and smaller entities should instead rely primarily upon their own names, to build up reputations and personal relationships using trade dress that can more easily be enforced by the secretary of state's business records and management staff. Impersonation of someone else's actual identity can prompt criminal prosecution, rather than a more difficult civil suit. This guy at futurestack does not quite grasp the legal concepts involved. Based on actual usage, he could make a case for a trademark over journals and periodical publications. If he found a newspaper or magazine calling itself futurestack, he could force them to change their name. As we know from frequent patent industry complaining, adding "on the Internet" to a thing does not make it a different thing. Blogs are categorically the same as newspapers. A trade conference is not a newspaper. It does not matter who attends. A trade conference for plumbers and steamfitters is categorically the same as a conference for web developers, or one for science fiction authors, or one for sasquatch hunters. There is no confusion between the actual things. No one arrives at the conference and says, "Hey, where are all the blog posts?". And no one visits the blog and says, "So where do I pick up my name tag?". So the instant he decided to impersonate the conference with his own web presence, he was infringing upon their trademark. Bad idea. They have more money and more supporters. He needs to back away immediately, apologize, and attempt to create some measure of cooperation. It couldn't hurt to add a disambiguation header to the blog that redirects accidental conference-related visitors to where they actually wanted to go.

trjordan 12y ago

"Lew Cirne" anagrams to "New Relic". "Future Stack" anagrams to "Astute Fucker". I think the folks at New Relic just have a thing for anagrams.

peterkelly 12y ago

and that's... why you always register a trademark

pyre 12y ago
Even if you register a trademark, it doesn't give a claim to the name that blankets the entire world, and every industry out there.

mcguire 12y ago

My name is Tommy McGuire. I am unaffiliated with Maj. Thomas B. McGuire[1] or McGuire Air Force Base[2] or any of the other people on the internet who may or may not use the name "mcguire" or "T. McGuire" or anything similar. Tl;dr: This is the world's smallest violin, playing "My heart bleeds for thee." [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_McGuire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_McGuire [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGuire_Air_Force_Base http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGuire_Air_Force_Base

Benjamin_Dobell 12y ago

So it turns out there are a lot of people in the world. Name clashes happen... all.. the... time! If you're that pedantic about a pseudonym, get a trademark. A mate of mine just 2 days ago had a 12 year old bug him on twitter to sell his twitter handle for $12. The kid has a terrible YouTube channel under the same name with plenty of videos 'tea-bagging' people in computer games and just generally being incredibly obnoxious. You know what my friend did?... laughed.

newrelic 12y ago

You don't own the name unless you file for a trademark, feel free to sue if you think otherwise.

jdong 12y ago
I wonder if this is the official stance of new relic.
- jasonlotito 12y ago
  Why would you wonder this?
endersshadow 12y ago
Assuming this is a joke account, but that's not how trademarks work. In fact, it's so far from how trademarks work that whoever made this account should be ashamed at how ignorant they are.
cpmsmith 12y ago
user: newrelic created: 53 minutes ago Seems less than official.
supermatt 12y ago
Think you need to read up on commonlaw trademarks. You don't need to register a trademark for it to be "owned".
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

ErikRogneby 12y ago

I wonder if @mentions on twitter meet the "substantial likelihood of confusion" test for trademark infringement?

kordless 12y ago

It's hysterical that the Pirate Hoover Shirt™ is at the top of the post and then at the bottom he was angry because someone offered him the shirt to try to make him feel better. I mean, what could be better than being offered The Best T-Shirt Ever Designed? (I was in the room when we came up with the shirt design, and I can tell you it was a happy time.) Sadly, that just pissed him off even more, which is a sign something is wrong somewhere with something. > a narcissist [1] [1] http://futurestack.com/static/about/ http://futurestack.com/static/about/

Anderkent 12y ago
Really hard to tell whether you're being sarcastic in: > what could be better than being offered The Best T-Shirt Ever Designed? (I was in the room when we came up with the shirt design, and I can tell you it was a happy time. I'd guess you were, but the parenthesed mention seems to go against that?
- kordless 12y ago
  No sarcasm. The Loggly Hoover shirts are loved by their owners. I'm biased because I invented Hoover (did not draw him however) but still, people love beavers and the funny shirts we did. I find it ironic that the guy was offended by being offered a shirt that basically takes nothing seriously and pretty much brings a smile to people's faces, and then puts it a the top of a rant post. BTW, I do appreciate his pain, I've had people steal my designs (and name to boot) before and it sucks.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

thefreeman 12y ago
the account was registered 16 minutes ago something tells me its not official...
newrelic 12y ago
haha fuck you dude, I make more in a week than you make in an year.
- pyre 12y ago
  Doesn't that just make you a target when The Revolution(tm) comes?
- TheMagicHorsey 12y ago
  Clearly not affiliated with NewRelic, and trying to start shit on the Internet.
eli 12y ago
Don't feed the trolls...
jasonlotito 12y ago
> Classy move. Seriously, the only thing this does is make it clear someone is childishly trying to screw over a company by making them look bad. It really won't work here.
- ColinWright 12y ago
  I was under no illusions that this new user was connected with "the real" New Relic. There is no evidence for that. My comments were directed at the person. I should've remembered that there are people who post this kind of thing just to screw around, and that no amount of engagement will turn them into someone of value. Yeah, I know, "Don't feed the trolls." Even on HN. I'll delete my comments, flag the inappropriate stuff, and move on.

socrates1998 12y ago

A lot of people are talking about how this guys doesn't understand Trademark law. Well, no shit. This conference stole his identity. He isn't claiming he has a right to the name. What the conference did was legal, but still not right. All too typical of people trying to build themselves up in status. They knew about this guy and they then they checked to see if he trademarked it. They knew they were legally okay, so they went ahead with it. Legal move, but a dick move.

codemaster3000 12y ago
Agreed. Not sure why the top post ITT is a rant about copyright law vs trademark laws. @futurestack never claimed legal rights to the name, he's just saying that what New Relic did was a total dick move.
viggity 12y ago
Agreed. In the word of "the dude" - "You're not wrong, Walter, you're just an asshole". Asshole is probably too harsh a word, but considering that "futurestack" was already taken as a domain and as a twitter account and both were in active use and related to technology, naming your conference "futurestack" seems a bit lame. Perhaps they could have done more to communicate what the official domain / twitter accounts were. (i.e. make them more prominent)
- futurestack 12y ago
  First smile I've had all day.
x1798DE 12y ago
I don't really see it as a dick move. They're not appropriating this guy's brand or pretending to be him. The worst that's happened so far is he got a few tweets not meant for him. He's not going to lose any business or reputation because a conference has the same name as him. He already owns the .com domain and has the twitter account for the name. I could see if they tried to make some move to steal his domain by trying to vulture a lapsed renewal, or sent him a C&D for use of the name, but basically their big crime was to have chosen the same name for their developer conference as he uses as his internet handle, and maybe they knew there was some guy who uses the same name. Name collisions are going to happen. There are a limited number of cool names. If it's not causing any real problems, then I don't see the big issue. That said, if I accidentally caused some guy to get a bunch of tweets not meant for him, I'd probably apologize about it privately (obviously it wasn't intentional). I definitely would try to talk to the guy before trying to get his twitter account suspended.

codemaster3000 12y ago

Why was this removed from the front page?

dogecoinbase 12y ago
If I had to guess, the same reason New Relic was able to get him quickly and easily suspended from Twitter without any contact from Twitter to him (which is standard) -- Bay Area tech friends.

DarkIye 12y ago

Your hasty "this is a rant" cover does nothing to compensate for the fact that nobody cares.