motor

Shinigami · 10-24-2006, 12:55 PM

In a way, yes. The B1 portion of the patent means that RC can reject this patent and then register it for himself.

On top of this, proof, such as the information which he spilt on the forums starting from a year ago, can be used to show that the intention of building the Zero to 60 magazine has been there longer then the registration of the trademark name.

Hope is not yet lost.

ZfrkS62 · 10-24-2006, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by Shinigami

In a way, yes. The B1 portion of the patent means that RC can reject this patent and then register it for himself.

On top of this, proof, such as the information which he spilt on the forums starting from a year ago, can be used to show that the intention of building the Zero to 60 magazine has been there longer then the registration of the trademark name.

Hope is not yet lost.

Well, in this case, i would get my own lawyer, present all the evidence of intent to use starting in 05 and take this one to court if need be.

Who knows, they may just buy the name from him for a nice lump sum

Shinigami · 10-24-2006, 01:40 PM

He should definitely get hold of a lawyer and a trademarks counsellor to double check all of this. But taking it to court might not be necessary. It's always better to settle this stuff outside of all legal hulabaloo. It can get dirty very quickly..

jakaracman · 10-24-2006, 03:31 PM

I'd tell them all that (basically threaten with long legal procedings) and try to work out a nice settlement for changing the name ...
It's a small project at this stage so changing a name wouldn't be a big deal - but getting some real money is ...

TeflonTron · 10-24-2006, 04:16 PM

Don't threaten them with leagal action unless you are willing, and able, to back it up. Large companies vigourously defend their copyrights, or even things that they believe they have copyrights over.

RC45 · 10-24-2006, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

Don't threaten them with leagal action unless you are willing, and able, to back it up. Large companies vigourously defend their copyrights, or even things that they believe they have copyrights over.

Rigourously defend what? The intention to one day go live with their project?

This is as absurd as CAR magazine taking on Car & Driver magazine because not only do they offer similar content, but the names are "essentially" the same".

I have a good mind to charge them for the "pre-emergent" marketing I have done on their behalf...

At this time Zero to 60 magazine is a top Google search result.. it seems that they would be encroaching on my market..

Firdosh7747 · 10-24-2006, 04:49 PM

((HOMO))

nthfinity · 10-24-2006, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Firdosh7747

((HOMO))

I am not sure what that is supposed to refer to.

Erez · 10-24-2006, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by RC45

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

Don't threaten them with leagal action unless you are willing, and able, to back it up. Large companies vigourously defend their copyrights, or even things that they believe they have copyrights over.

Rigourously defend what? The intention to one day go live with their project?

This is as absurd as CAR magazine taking on Car & Driver magazine because not only do they offer similar content, but the names are "essentially" the same".

I have a good mind to charge them for the "pre-emergent" marketing I have done on their behalf...

At this time Zero to 60 magazine is a top Google search result.. it seems that they would be encroaching on my market..

hell yeah..

if they eventually will get the name at least get some money out of their pockets

(though I hope they wont get the name and will be forced to use another one..)

Originally Posted by Firdosh7747

((HOMO))

TeflonTron · 10-24-2006, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by RC45

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

Don't threaten them with leagal action unless you are willing, and able, to back it up. Large companies vigourously defend their copyrights, or even things that they believe they have copyrights over.

Rigourously defend what? The intention to one day go live with their project?

This is as absurd as CAR magazine taking on Car & Driver magazine because not only do they offer similar content, but the names are "essentially" the same".

I have a good mind to charge them for the "pre-emergent" marketing I have done on their behalf...

At this time Zero to 60 magazine is a top Google search result.. it seems that they would be encroaching on my market..

Read what I said: or even things that they believe they have copyrights over.

That doesn't mean to say that they are in the right, just that they will fight their corner if they feel that they can win the case. Big companies are not interested in what is right or wrong, just in what they can win. Heck, Nissan sued a company who had the domain of Nissan.com years before Nissan was even a company (they were still Datsun at that time) and the case is still raging in the US Supreme Court, 7 years after Nissan first sued. My advice, for what it is worth, is this: if you feel that you are in the right then fight the other company, but be aware that it can be drawn out, tiring and very expensive should they choose to make it so.

The very best of luck with your situation.

RC45 · 10-24-2006, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

Read what I said: or even things that they believe they have copyrights over.

I read what you said - it was in english after al

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

That doesn't mean to say that they are in the right, just that they will fight their corner if they feel that they can win the case. Big companies are not interested in what is right or wrong, just in what they can win.

Uhm - nope, big companies are interested in bottomline - the entire motivaiton for the aciton against us is motivated by their potential of lost revenues.

The fight for a fight case would not even be an issue if their was no moeny motivation..

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

Heck, Nissan sued a company who had the domain of Nissan.com years before Nissan was even a company (they were still Datsun at that time) and the case is still raging in the US Supreme Court, 7 years after Nissan first sued.

Wow - this story has almost become an urban legend.

Datsun became Nissan before the concept of nissan.com was even a possibility..

If I am not mistaken Datsun beacme Nissan before 1984.

Now the story of the lawsuit is true, but didn't quite go down the way yu think it did

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

My advice, for what it is worth, is this: if you feel that you are in the right then fight the other company, but be aware that it can be drawn out, tiring and very expensive should they choose to make it so.

Well - the advice is free so I'll take it as such

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

The very best of luck with your situation.

They need the luck..

wfrigginlewis · 10-24-2006, 06:59 PM

Hey, I'm currently in law school and regarding your website name there is some precedent. Zippo manufacturing, which makes Zippo lighters, was able to succesfully sue zippo.com which was a message board for trademark infringement. Zippo Manufacturing won. This is not meant to be taken as legal advice, and you should consult an attorney. You should preferably consult a fancy pants lawyer from New York because that is where the legal proceedings would take place because the court would most likely rule that New York has jurisdiction over you for harming a NY business. Do not threaten legal action because without actually knowing that you have a valid defense, a threat of legal action is an improper threat. But if you get a lawyer and you do have a valid defense, then a threat of legal action is a proper threat. Of course, Zero to 60 may belong to the public and neither of you can actually own the phrase, which is what you should hope for.

So, again, consult an attorney.

Pimp Racer · 10-24-2006, 07:15 PM

Wow that sucks ass man! I wonder how the fuck he found out about it?
If it was me i'd pick up my uzi and pay his bastard ass a visit!:snipersmile: :snipersmile:

:2gunfire: :2gunfire:

Or.....you can do it Ghandi's way. Hey you never know man his way might work.....i mean a fucking skinny ass old man with no shoes and a fucking sheet drove out the Brit's...now thats something rite there.

Anyways just try to reason with him/her and then if they still be stuborn then have a meeting with your lawer and then go from there. Good luck man.

TeflonTron · 10-24-2006, 07:30 PM

RC: Win as in "win money". We both know that businesses are out to protect their interests and get what they can get from others: that's what makes the world go round, so to speak. Anyway, as i said, if you do fight be prepared for whatever may come.

ZfrkS62 · 10-24-2006, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by wfrigginlewis

Hey, I'm currently in law school and regarding your website name there is some precedent. Zippo manufacturing, which makes Zippo lighters, was able to succesfully sue zippo.com which was a message board for trademark infringement. Zippo Manufacturing won. This is not meant to be taken as legal advice, and you should consult an attorney. You should preferably consult a fancy pants lawyer from New York because that is where the legal proceedings would take place because the court would most likely rule that New York has jurisdiction over you for harming a NY business. Do not threaten legal action because without actually knowing that you have a valid defense, a threat of legal action is an improper threat. But if you get a lawyer and you do have a valid defense, then a threat of legal action is a proper threat. Of course, Zero to 60 may belong to the public and neither of you can actually own the phrase, which is what you should hope for.

So, again, consult an attorney.

Yeah, but Zippo lighters have been around for decades before the intardweb was even conceptualized, so there is a cut and dry point there.

This, IMO, is a bit different and is a bit more in the gray area than zippo vs zippo.