Re:You Can Call the Super Bowl the "Super Bowl"
by SllX on Monday February 12, 2024 @02:42AM
(#39342486)
Side tangent: does Apple itself even use the term "smartphone" anywhere? The term has been dated for like 10 years, and I'm not sure they used it even before then to refer to their phones. Just curious.
But for whatever it's worth, Ericsson was the first to market something called a "smartphone" with the R380 released in November 2000.
Re:You Can Call the Super Bowl the "Super Bowl"
by withzombies on Monday February 12, 2024 @04:41PM
(#39350912)
Fun fact, Cisco actually owns the trademarks to iPhone and IOS and licenses them to Apple[1]. IOS is their famous operating system and iPhone was a product offered by Linksys which they acquired when they purchased Linksys.
Re:You Can Call the Super Bowl the "Super Bowl"
by kqr2 on Monday February 12, 2024 @01:56AM
(#39342237)
Maybe the EFF should prepare a standard reply people can use when they receive a threatening letter from the NFL to cease and desist from using the term "Super Bowl"?
Re:You Can Call the Super Bowl the "Super Bowl"
by aftoprokrustes on Monday February 12, 2024 @06:40AM
(#39343779)
Indeed, I wonder what is the reason. The only explanation I can think of would be that the event is already widely advertised by "authorized" partnering media - who thus have an interest in preserving the aura of the event - and scaring everyone unauthorized of trying to mention the event might be a disguised way to avoid critics. If you cannot name the super bowl, you cannot write an article about its ecological impact, the commercial revenues, the working conditions, etc.
But I have absolutely no knowledge about the event, so if anyone has a more informed opinion, I would be very interested.
Re:You Can Call the Super Bowl the "Super Bowl"
by dtagames on Monday February 12, 2024 @09:06AM
(#39344880)
The restriction is on using their trademarked term to advertise another commercial product. Take snacks, for example. Frito-Lay can put an endcap at the grocery store to promote chips for the game and it can have a huge "GAME DAY" banner overhead, or even "THE BIG GAME." But if they were to write Super Bowl to try and associate the NFL's brand with their brand for the purpose of selling stuff, they'd find themselves quickly in court.
The article is dumb because it misses this very important point. Yes, it's ok for you and me to write about the Super Bowl in many contexts, but it's not ok for us to appropriate their branding for our own commercial gain -- and most people who own IP would be probably be ok with that.
Re:You Can Call the Super Bowl the "Super Bowl"
by bubble12345 on Monday February 12, 2024 @07:37AM
(#39344122)
Super Bowl is a trademark of NFL, and to keep a trademark you need to "defend" it. Which lawyers presumably interpret as sending cease and desist letters every now and then
Re:You Can Call the Super Bowl the "Super Bowl"
by Gormo on Monday February 12, 2024 @12:48PM
(#39347918)
But the caveat is that trademark law only applies to usages that are likely to cause confusion within the same product category, or to imply some endorsement/connection with the trademark holder.
People using your brand to refer to your product in normal modes of communication isn't a violation of your trademark in the first place, and does not need to be defended against.
Re:You Can Call the Super Bowl the "Super Bowl"
by AstroJetson on Monday February 12, 2024 @09:40AM
(#39345249)
We just hold the party with repurposed Halloween decorations. Lots of owls around for our "Superb Owl" party. (You'd almost think it was a Harry Potter convention, but I'm more afraid of Warner Brothers legal than the NFL. YMMV)
But for whatever it's worth, Ericsson was the first to market something called a "smartphone" with the R380 released in November 2000.
Yes, they do, but AFAICT only in phrases similar to “eligible trade‑in smartphone”.
I think they never used it to refer to their product. It was “iPhone” from the start. Why would they use a generic term to describe a premium product?
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/09/apple-debuts-iphone-1...
"For the first time in a smartphone, color is infused throughout the back glass"
"the Ceramic Shield front cover continues to be tougher than any other smartphone glass"
"iPhone lasts and holds its value longer than any other smartphone"
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/09/apple-unveils-iphone-...
"Continuing Apple’s leadership in smartphone silicon"
"console titles never before seen on a smartphone"
"The best quality video in a smartphone"
"The preferred smartphone for creative pros and filmmakers"
"the first Thread-enabled smartphones"
Lots of results there, especially press releases.
[1]. https://appleinsider.com/articles/10/06/08/cisco_licenses_io...
But I have absolutely no knowledge about the event, so if anyone has a more informed opinion, I would be very interested.
The article is dumb because it misses this very important point. Yes, it's ok for you and me to write about the Super Bowl in many contexts, but it's not ok for us to appropriate their branding for our own commercial gain -- and most people who own IP would be probably be ok with that.
People using your brand to refer to your product in normal modes of communication isn't a violation of your trademark in the first place, and does not need to be defended against.
Otherwise, the NFL can drown you in legal fees.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRi8LptvFZY