• FatCrab@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    It boils down to likelihood of confusion. I think there would be a legitimate concern here, tbh. But they could have come to an agreement when one registered their mark after the other one had already.

    • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I was talking about being able to get a trademark for anything that is “superX” where X could be literally any word in the dictionary. Its too vague and generic and such an application would almost certainly be rejected.

      Supercell, Supergiant, and Supermassive are all trademarkable, and while “super” could cause some confusion, the USPTO doesn’t care so much about that particular point because the wordmarks are all different and the logos are all different.

      There is technically nothing stopping a computer software company trademark for “Microstar.” Unless it already exists obviously, but for the sake of argument let’s imagine it doesn’t. Even though the name could cause some confusion with Microsoft, as long as the wordmark and logo design are different they USPTO won’t care.

        • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I mean, mikerowesoft might have a visibly different spelling and logo, but it is audibly pronounced the same. There is a legitimate argument to be made there, no matter how stupid it is. But none of that matters because it was settled out of court. And Microsoft admitted afterward they were too heavy handed in their approach.