|
Search this group's discussions
|
'SLart' is trademarked! Can they do that?!
|
Recently a lot of avatars and humans received so-called 'cease and desist' e-mails or IM's from Richard Minsky because they were using the word 'SLart' on their blog, in their profile, ... .
Mr Minsky claims he has trademarked the word. I blogged about it at SLasshole trademarks SLart.
Does anybody have some more legal knowledge on this, and is willing to help us - all, I'm sure more 'cease and desist' will follow - out?
Posted at 2:06PM, 18 January 2008 PDT
(permalink)
|
|
Organize > Select All > (drag to window) > Add Tags > "SLArt"
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Great, Nikolaidis, I'll add that 'how to' on the blogpost too!
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
!!! Update: Benjamin Duranske found me this. Which is very bad news. Yet, I still think, he has no right to 'trademark this'. The trademark request was filed on the 26th of March 2007, and as from how it looks, approved. !!!
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Yes.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Yes on which question? Yes on 'this sucks'?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@Vint, according to your timeline in your blog comments, shouldn't that be enough to shut his cake-hole?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
GM, no, as he filed the trademark before that. It went only public afterwards. He must have been aware of that when he filed the cease and desist letter. I'm not sure about the legal stuff regarding the time frame. Really, I'm not sure about much here at the moment. :(
But I see no 'reasonable grounds' here. I can say a painting is 'impressionist' and nobody would get a trademark on that. So why can't I say second life art is SLart - the general accepted name for it? Yes, indeed, because some greedy ass trademarked this.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
VintFalken edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
I believe that is Artworld Market
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Since when did "SLart" become the generally accepted name for things created inworld?
If anyone called anything I've ever made that, I'd punch them
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Kisa, if you weren't already getting hitched, I'd say I love you.
Btw: want to get around it, put a space between SL and art. Problem solved.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
~Kitty edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
Fuck! that is really fucking stupid IMHFO!
it is my art when i sell it in-world!
(someone has been hitting the crack pipe too often)*not me*
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Call is slart then :)
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
ooops I meant "call it slart" since he trademarked SLart, which I agree is ridiculous
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
There's this definition from the Urban Dictionary, which just about sums it up.....
Slart - A fart that escapes during sleep, sometimes waking the slarter him(her)self.
www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Slart
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
lol
Actually, according to what Market has said, all capitalizations are trademarked: SLART, SLArt, SLart, Slart, etc.
-- Sho
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Is there an issue with the fact that he has embedded another trademark in his own? (SL). I'd bet that if Linden Lab went after him with a cease and desist of their own, he might have a problem on his hands. Is that a possibility? Seems logical, though logic seldom drives the legal process in the US.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
Felony Fabre edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
What about writing SecondLifeArt.... just dont abreviate!
OR how about SLA......??
Dunno just a thought....
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
SLA is a registered trademark of 3d Systems, inc.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Ahhh booo....
well it was just a thought!
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
SL Art, generic words used to "Tag" what most of us do in SL.
The fact this has the space (as Katarina Malthus suggests) should ensure people dont receive the dreaded 'cease and desist' e-mails.
As for "slarty" farty what a waste of money...
rgds
clyde
PS if there is anyone who can help with my new post about "accessing my flickr account - help!!) would be greatly appreciated.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
clyde essex edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
My assessment:
1) This is fully legal
2) This person has invested a large amount of money, as filing requires a $325 flat fee, and $325.00 per category (depending on filing type), totalling 8775 USD, give or take.
3) It is possible that he wants to use it to simply sue people. I view this as unlikely, as most judges would toss it out of court as SLart and it's differently spaced brethren have been in common use for a significant period of time (point in case the SLartists magazine I've been in the process of publishing for some months, prior to the other entity using the name, of which the preissue is already in circulation to adversitser's and associates)
4) If he is using it for his company, I still don't think you have anything to worry about.
5) If you have a serious problem with it, file a contesting document with the TRSS (http://www.uspto.gov/teas/)
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Since I haven't been given a notice not to discuss it ...
I know that he is using it as a weapon, threatening to sue Rezzable for use at the Cannery and its publications.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
O boy,
he trademarked it in the US. I wish him good luck to go to court against people living in other countries. I don't believe he trademarked it in all countries of the world. And according to european law concerning electronic services, it's the law of the place of residence who is applicable and not the place of hosting.
I wish Mr Minsky good luck. The trademark can protect him in RL, but that's about it. What a waste of money.
PS: Does it mean I can't TAG a Mercedes or Ford picture on Flickr because there's a trademark on the brandname ?
/me points her index to her temple and turns
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
So Bella, I can tag just like everything with slart, SLart and/or SLART?
And just what you said too, I don't know how that works in America, but here in Holland, you can only sue people for a trademarkabuse when the trademark is used in a bad way, which can give the company a bad name. Or when a company uses the word in there name or slogan. But NOT when you use it to tag things on the internet.
Still... what about the SLart Magazines....
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"PS: Does it mean I can't TAG a Mercedes or Ford picture on Flickr because there's a trademark on the brandname ?
/me points her index to her temple and turns"
Technically, if you put it out there, you're supposed to include the TM symbol after it. However, the danger comes in the company's desire to prosecute you. If you aren't threatening their business, or using it for profit, there is little chance there will be any litigation.
@Shoshana
I'm sorry to inform him, but the use of those terms at both entities is grandfathered, as it was present long before he filed his trademark application, no judge will hold that up in court.
Edit: This is akin to someone filing a trademark on the word 'after.' It's a word in common use, and even though you would be allowed to trademark it, unless someone was using it specifically against your good name, they don't have a case.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
~Kitty edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
How about you tag it SL photography or SL design?
People will still be able to find your stuff.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Mariel, my major 'upsettiness' is about him calling something his that does not belong to him. If he ever did, if he first used 'SLart' which I doubt, it still belongs to the SL community by now. So I don't see why all the avatars should change their descriptive language on SL artwork, just because Mr. Minsky got greedy?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
hmm, wonder what he'd do if there were 100 new alts with the first name of SLart, or variations of that theme?
winks evilly
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
There shouldn't be any problem with tagging things with "SLart". Tagging is only keywords used to enable searching.
I don't even think using the word itself in blogs as a means of describing things would violate any trademark issues.
Even with copywritten work and trademarked work, you are still allowed to use certain things in a editorial capacity.
There can be no complete ban on the use of the term "SLart"
For if things are so strict so that trademarked words cannot be used, no newspaper in the world would be able to use the name of a sports team in a sports article, no movie review would be able to name the movie, nor indeed would any product review be able to name the product.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Nothing wrong with using trademarked words.
As long as you don't use the word for commercial gain he can't do shit to you.
*me goes add the tag slart to all his screenshots ... even though they're hardly art*
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
That guy has been pretty active. He filed SLART ( which means the 4-character-combination in ANY form) as service-mark, meaning that:
"Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: (Based on Use in Commerce) Multimedia publishing of books, magazines, journals, software, games, music, and electronic publications; On-line publication of art; Publication of electronic magazines; Publication of electronic newspapers accessible via a global computer network; Publication of the editorial content of sites accessible via a global computer network; Publishing of electronic publications; Art exhibitions; Conducting workshops and seminars in art; Instruction in the field of art; Workshops and seminars in the field of art; (Based on Intent to Use) Publication and editing of printed matter; Publication of books; Publication of books, magazines, almanacs and journals; Publication of books, of magazines, of journals, of newspapers, of periodicals, of catalogs, of brochures; Publication of books, reviews; Publication of brochures; Publication of documents in the field of training, science, public law and social affairs; Publication of journals; Publication of leaflets; Publication of magazines; Publication of manuals; Publication of musical texts; Publication of printed matter; Publication of text books; Publication of texts, books, journals; Publication of texts, books, magazines and other printed matter; Education in the field of art rendered through correspondence courses; Education in the field of art rendered through video conference; Educational services in the nature of art schools; Organizing community festivals featuring a variety of activities, namely sporting events, art exhibitions, flea markets, ethnic dances and the like. FIRST USE: 20061209. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20061214"
Nota bene: This concernes COMMERCIAL USE and US-LAW. A short scan didn't reveal the information, whether this guy has it protected for Europe, too. If not, then the lucky Europeans may use the term on European-hosted websites, as well as the Japanese for japanese-hosted web-sites, as far as I know currently. I'll look deeper into that matter over the next few days.
Btw, if You're going to use the term SLART, it might be a good idea to declare it somehow differently than a service mark; definition as follows:
"A service mark is any word, name, symbol, device, or any combination, used, or intended to be used, in commerce, to identify and distinguish the services of one provider from services provided by others, and to indicate the source of the services."
If YOu wanna go deeper into that matter, look up www.uspto.gov, select "trademarks" and TESS, and search for SLART which will directly to the file with all details.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@Skusting Dagger: It's not that You must'nt use them. You can use them, but if You do, by written law You have to pay the owner of the trademark a fee. Wheather it makes sense in any and every case, is another story. Of course it's ridiculous to claim a tag as a trademark, for this is hardly intellectual property worth protecting, but nontheless he's got the law on his side. Still - I think if it would go to court, there's still the question of commensurability...,he would have to spend his next three lifes in just sueing people...
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Lets all club together and trademark Richard Minsky and sue his SLass lol
Seriously I don't think he has a leg to stand on and has obviously got way too much time on his hands if he's hunting bloggers and AV's with cease and desist orders.
If you are that bothered call it SL-art
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Hey!
This is a great READ on this topic...
Get a chance? Check it out.
www.vintfalken.com/
- Aya Liotta
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Thanks, Aya.
After an article on Virtually Blind it is now more or less clear that Minsky should not have gotten the trademark in the first place, that was an error of the officer that gave out the trademark.
Also, Minsky replied on his blog, turning all the facts his way 'well, now at least artists get a chance to learn about trademark'. LMAO
More conversation in the comments on my latest blog entry on this or on Virtually Blind.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@arminiusheron
I wonder how any of this applies to any photograph ever taken of TImes Square.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
If You actually read the application procedure, there are a couple of points, that would be interesting to look at, concerning, how Mr. Minsky stated them;
§1-406 (c) " In addition to any other information required on an application form, the form shall require:
(7) the date when the applicant or the applicnt's predecessors in business:
(i) first used the mark anywhere, and
(ii) first used the mark in the state; and (I'm pretty sure, not as long as Rezzable...)
(8) a statement that
(i) the applicant owns the mark (which, in my eyes, he clearly doesn't)
(ii) another person does not have the right to use the mark in the State; and
(iii) the mark is not deceptively similar to a mark that another person has a right to use in the State."
§1-404 (c) (1) Unless the mark has become distinctive of the person’s goods or services, a person may not register a mark that:
(i) only describes or deceptively misdescribes goods or services;
clear violation, I would say.
Of course, those are pure formal issues and probably too late to object to, anyway, but in the future we might have a foothold there, if the application was filed incorrectly.
All the cited above is US Trademark Law
mlis.state.md.us/asp/web_statutes.asp?gbr&1-404 and following
Posted 52 months ago.
(permalink)
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
|
Second Life /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to Second Life discussion threads
