BMW Already Owns The Trademark On Alphabet

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I guess that's what you get for not using Google to find out if your new business name is taken or not. Whoops!

Alphabet is the name that Mr. Page and Mr. Brin, Google’s founders, have given the newly created parent entity that will house the Google search business and several smaller holdings like Nest, a maker of smart thermostats, and Calico, a company focused on longevity. But Alphabet is also the name of a BMW subsidiary that provides services to corporations with vehicle fleets.
 
Same shit happened with Apple. Original agreement from 1982 said no music. Agreement was broken several times.

Undisclosed amount of money (likely) changed hands every time they rewrote the terms, and life went on. Yawn.
 
It's a common word in the English language FFS, this is why Microsoft does not get to sue Pella or Milgard or any number of other WINDOWS manufacturers.
 
sfsuphysics said:
It's a common word in the English language FFS, this is why Microsoft does not get to sue Pella or Milgard or any number of other WINDOWS manufacturers.
Click to expand...

There is also a major difference in that it's not reasonable to think consumers will confuse actual windows with a software company's OS. Google is involved in the automotive space though (self driving cars, Android OS for cars...). Not exactly the same.
 
I'm surprised they didn't put much effort into this, it's almost like they woke up one morning and said "what's a word that will put us earlier in the listing of the phonebook over Apple?" Which was a common tactic when phonebooks were still used (hence all of the " A-Z Service " and "ABC Company").

They halfassed a webpage which points to Google's investor page. They halfassed the trademark search. They didn't even try on a logo or securing alphabet.com.

To be frank, they put more effort into April Fools day pranks. At least those have competent branding.
 
This will be fun because some years ago google and BMW had a little spat over BMW using some shady tactics to increase their search results.
 
GUYS.... Google can still TM Alphabet.
Trademark infringement can ONLY occur where the goods or services at issue are similar or the same. There can only be TM infringement where the average consumer of the goods at issue is likely to be confused.

That's TM 101.

A holding company for other companies is NOT going to be confused with a corporate fleet-vehicle sales company. The customers are completely different (heck, there ARE NO customers for Alphabet.)
No customer confusion (no customers!?) no TM infringement.

Example: Remington firearms and Remington electric shavers. A person buying a shotgun is not going to be confused between the two companies. Different customers, different products, no confusion.
Or Delta faucets and Delta Airlines.
Wrangler Jeans and the Jeep Wrangler.
Tons of others.
 
It's easy to forget that other businesses exist when viewing the world from the top of your tower.

After all, how could all those tiny ants have ideas?
 
Modred189 said:
GUYS.... Google can still TM Alphabet.
Trademark infringement can ONLY occur where the goods or services at issue are similar or the same. There can only be TM infringement where the average consumer of the goods at issue is likely to be confused.

That's TM 101.

A holding company for other companies is NOT going to be confused with a corporate fleet-vehicle sales company. The customers are completely different (heck, there ARE NO customers for Alphabet.)
No customer confusion (no customers!?) no TM infringement.

Example: Remington firearms and Remington electric shavers. A person buying a shotgun is not going to be confused between the two companies. Different customers, different products, no confusion.
Or Delta faucets and Delta Airlines.
Wrangler Jeans and the Jeep Wrangler.
Tons of others.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why and how Apple Inc. sued the Big Apple over the later's logo and lost. I mean no one would confuse a personal computer with New York City.

Oh wait.
 
Skripka said:
Which is exactly why and how Apple Inc. sued the Big Apple over the later's logo and lost. I mean no one would confuse a personal computer with New York City.

Oh wait.
Click to expand...

That's not even close to the facts.
First, Apple didn't sue anyone. They went to the USPTO and opposed the filing of an picture mark for an evironmental campaign by the city. Do keep in m ind that word marks and picture marks are a little different.

Second, the city won. Before the USPTO could rule on the application as it, the GreenNYC campaign amended its design and the USPTO allowed it instantly over Apple's objection.

So, I think you may be confused...
 
I'm sure Google just assumed they could buy out anyone they needed to secure rights and trademarks.
 
They're Google they can do whatever they want. This is such a retelling of the big Oligopoly sized manufacturing companies like GM manifesting near the beginning of the 20th century. But in fast forward.
 
Modred189 said:
GUYS.... Google can still TM Alphabet.
Trademark infringement can ONLY occur where the goods or services at issue are similar or the same. There can only be TM infringement where the average consumer of the goods at issue is likely to be confused.

That's TM 101.

A holding company for other companies is NOT going to be confused with a corporate fleet-vehicle sales company. The customers are completely different (heck, there ARE NO customers for Alphabet.)
No customer confusion (no customers!?) no TM infringement.

Example: Remington firearms and Remington electric shavers. A person buying a shotgun is not going to be confused between the two companies. Different customers, different products, no confusion.
Or Delta faucets and Delta Airlines.
Wrangler Jeans and the Jeep Wrangler.
Tons of others.
Click to expand...

Try telling that to Monster.
 
Parja said:
Try telling that to Monster.
Click to expand...

Just because the law is the law doesn't mean people don't ignore it, whether it be on the compliance or enforcement side. I can file a lawsuit about whatever I want. it doesn't mean it's a good one or lawful.

They also lost the vast majority of their lawsuits as a result, and in several cases, ended up paying the other side's attorney's fees.
 
Modred189 said:
Example: Remington firearms and Remington electric shavers. A person buying a shotgun is not going to be confused between the two companies. Different customers, different products, no confusion.
Click to expand...

You insensitive a-hole! My uncle lost his life due to that exact confusion. On the morning of his hearing for money laundering all he wanted was to look good for his court appearance.

They found him in his bedroom with his head blown off and a Remington shotgun on the floor. I knew deep in my heart, that he simply confused the brand names. And had they used different names, he never would have stuck that shotgun up to his chin....EXACTLY the thing you would do with a shaver. :(
 
westrock2000 said:
You insensitive a-hole! My uncle lost his life due to that exact confusion. On the morning of his hearing for money laundering all he wanted was to look good for his court appearance.

They found him in his bedroom with his head blown off and a Remington shotgun on the floor. I knew deep in my heart, that he simply confused the brand names. And had they used different names, he never would have stuck that shotgun up to his chin....EXACTLY the thing you would do with a shaver. :(
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO.
IP humor! HARHAR!:D:D:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top