Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Trademark Violation - Page 2
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Trademark Violation

2»

Comments

  • I wanted to paste my rambling here, but CLOUDFLARE decided to shut down lowendshutdown.com.

    "Try searching this:
    https://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmtext/Results

    Very reassurring how meaningless their trademark is.
    https://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK00001525078
    https://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK00001525078
    http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=+1664890&caseType=US_REGISTRATION_NO&searchType=statusSearch US gov's site isn't really useful.

    Search results
    Your search found 136 results. Page 1 of 14 is shown. "

  • MikePTMikePT Moderator, Patron Provider, Veteran

    People love drama...

    Don't worry with that email. All they did was asking what kind of services you provide, in order to make sure you're not using "VPS" to sell something similar to their products/services. That's all. They didn't threat you with a lawyer, they just want you to clarify what kind of business you're doing. There's no need to hire a lawyer, at all.

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider

    I would be very careful answering their questions. Researching your use of "VPS" is fundamentally their job, not yours, and it smells like legal bait to me.

  • If they don't sell vps servers, than you have no problem. They're asking you to explain what vps means in your name. They have to defend their vps trademark if your vps infringes on their brand. Since they don't list servers in their branding information, they have no claim.

  • WHTWHT Member

    If they have right of that name then 1 million domains should be taken down :)

  • Just a quick update, the EFF didn't seem interested though I'm going to see if they can refer me to anyone. I still haven't received any official mail from this company though I haven't checked today (I would assume it would be here by Wed at the latest) if the EFF refers me to someone I'm going to talk to them about how I should reply, since I don't want this to come back and haunt me in any way, shape or form. I will update this when I take my next actions.

  • singsingsingsing Member
    edited October 2015

    leona said: Since they don't list servers in their branding information, they have no claim.

    Wrong. The legal issue is "likelihood of confusion", not whether the plaintiff lists the market of the defendant in their registration information. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/Lapp_test

    I'm not saying they have a strong case by any means, just that your metric for evaluating the strength of the case is not the one actually used by courts in the U.S.

    VPSSoldiers said: Just a quick update, the EFF didn't seem interested

    Big surprise. This issue isn't about free speech or privacy rights, so unlikely to interest them. Plus, there's an abundance of intellectual property lawyers out there, and this is a relatively simple case. I think they just assume you can find one competent to handle this case without being referred. Plus, I think it will be cheaper for you to work with a small outfit (but qualified, do your research). I still think it's too early to call in counsel and you should just reply courteously with basic info about your business and go about your business.

  • emgemg Veteran

    IANAL, but I believe that even if Levi, Ray & Shoup, Inc. could win a claim that their "VPS" trademark covers virtual private servers, they failed to protect it from becoming genericized. As others have pointed out, the term VPS is in common use everywhere, and Levi, Ray & Shoup, Inc. has invested very little effort to protect it. If they try to enforce their claim that their trademark covers all uses of "VPS" in the technology industry as they imply, they may very well lose control of the trademark even for printer support.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks

  • singsingsingsing Member
    edited October 2015

    emg said: As others have pointed out, the term VPS is in common use everywhere

    I wonder, if I mentioned VPS to my dentist, would he think virtual private servers? A bit of googling reveals that he'd be more likely to think Vinyl Polysiloxane (a material used for dental impressions and also abbreviated VPS).

    No, VPS as meaning "virtual private server" is not in such common use everywhere that you can say it is a genericized trademark. First of all, VPS, when used in the sense of "virtual private server" did not begin as a trademark, which makes all of the case law relating to genericized trademarks hard to apply to this case.

    Real legal research is needed to find those cases in which courts have addressed the same pattern of facts. I.e., company A obtains a trademark T, then T acquires an unrelated meaning in a (somewhat) different field B, and person/company C wants to use Tsolutions, Tshop, Tmarket, getyourT, ..., as a business name, slogan, or domain for an endeavor within field B.

    Most likely, if you do this research, you will find that it is kosher, and you will also know the factors the court looked at in making its determination so you can help steer clear of trouble, and you will also know what cases to cite in pre-litigation correspondence to curb a potential plaintiff's enthusiasm. You don't get any of these benefits by just guessing what the law might be without research.

  • As other mentioned, I too would wait until (if) you get the notice via snail mail before further actions.

    Maybe they were trying to be "nice" and hoping to find out more about your business. Still - I find their choice of words in the title more than questionable... "UNAUTHORIZED USE OF VPS® TRADEMARK" - sounds to me as if they were approaching you with a premade conclusion.

  • kkrajkkkrajk Member
    edited October 2015

    let them research about your company on their own.. A quick view of your website would reveal what they require. Whatever you reply could be used against you if not carefully worded..

    Don't reply - email / snail mail. Let they themselves do what they are paid for

    Edit - Some resource you can make use of
    http://www.wipo.int/romarin/searchAction.do

    Thanked by 1GM2015
  • smansman Member
    edited October 2015

    When I had to deal with a trademark issue I got a lawyer involved. I just told them to contact my lawyer and gave them the contact info. Never heard from them again.

    If you read up on trademark law it states that they have to actively defend their trademark or risk losing it. So I think a lot of the time that is what these letters are about.

    I would suggest you read up on trademark law. There is lots of good info out there that doesn't take too long to read and is easy to understand. After you understand a bit more about it then you will be in a better position to decide what to do.

    I actually feel pretty good about trademark law after going through this and reading up on it. There may be lots of grey area but the intent of the law is quite clear. Doesn't seem like it is all that easy to troll and abuse unlike US patent laws.

Sign In or Register to comment.