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.
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.
That's not what he said or meant, but it's what you are trying to say he said or meant. Think about it. (Edit: Looks like he did. Exciting!)
The author of the parent comment seems to have said that initially, based on his edit descriptions.
He may have a proprietary claim in the area he practices his arts. He has no other claims.
If he actually understood this, he would not be moaning to us today in this post, which is obviously trying to name and shame the conference.
Well, I'm not cool with this BS name and shame game, that is why I wrote my comment. And I think the comment was pretty level-headed given this guys complete lack of thought into how such accusations might play out in a court of public opinion, where people don't actually think about the consequences of automatic IP rights for "first speaking" names.
In a world literally flooded by brands and names, name collision is not rudeness, it is almost inevitable.
Aside from that - well, it was a pretty rude move, particularly in that they didn't bother to acknowledge him when he talked to them (albeit over twitter) before ranting about it.
I don't think there's a question that the conference can do this legally, but they're still being ass-hats by ignoring it (and getting his twitter account suspended).
I just don't think people have to abandon a cool name just because someone somewhere registered a domain or has a twitter handle with the same name.
Ideally you make up a new word for your new enterprise. But it ends up being harder than you think if you are trying to name something with an identifier that means something in a domain. Anyone that has to name a new product or company can attest to this.
A registered trademark should not prevent somebody from continuing a usage which they were engaged in first, before the trademark was registered. If the business activities overlap then the registration itself should be rejected, if not it is likely to be invalid and can be challenged.
I don't believe that the business activities of is guy and the developer conference are sufficiently similar, I doubt he has any recourse, nor should he have expected any.
You do raise the very relevant point that tlds don't equate to trademark categories and that in a more just world domains should therefore be out of reach until the laws catch up with this.
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.