BlackBerry Forums Support Community               

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-12-2006, 03:45 PM   #21 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
secrecyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern California, USA
Model: 8100
Carrier: T-mobile
Posts: 1,238
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Please Login to Remove!

They already fix the page.
Offline  
Old 12-12-2006, 06:22 PM   #22 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Model: Pearl
Posts: 2
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMoze
Feel free to disagree with an IP attorney who actually deals with trademark infringement. I guarantee your uninformed opinion won't sway any court.
lol...asking a lawyer if RIM has a "case" is like asking your kid if they like candy.

you can sue anybody for just about anything in this country (i heard on the radio today someone tried to sue God for losing his job haha)...whether you win or not is a different story.

this case reminds me of the case where BMW sued Infiniti for using the letter M in their name (BMW's M-series vs. Infiniti's M35/M45). not sure how that went.

RIM is prolly just trying to differentiate their products to the market/masses and lawsuits are relatively inexpensive way to do so.

from a consumer point of view though, this is a pretty frivolous lawsuit. it makes it look like RIM is afraid of a little competition or worse RIM doesn't trust the consumer to differentiate between BlackJack and BlackBerry products.

makes me think twice about getting any RIM product (was considering 8800)...maybe i'll wait for the ePhone instead.

JMHO
Offline  
Old 12-12-2006, 08:43 PM   #23 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
ibrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: earth
Model: 0000
Carrier: T-Mo
Posts: 375
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdo99
makes me think twice about getting any RIM product (was considering 8800)...maybe i'll wait for the ePhone instead.
JMHO
I call it the iPhone but what the heck: I'll wait too...lol
Offline  
Old 12-13-2006, 08:47 AM   #24 (permalink)
GMK
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
GMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Model: 8100
Carrier: TMO
Posts: 353
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

RIM has to sue. If you hold a trademark, it is the holders obligation to vigorously defend it or lose it, not only to competitors but into the general lexicon. if RIM doesn't defend it "Blackberrying" could become a general use term and any phone that has a competitive system could use the expression such as "for a Blackberry experience, use our phone...". Or such.
Offline  
Old 12-13-2006, 01:38 PM   #25 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
SanFrancisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Francisco
Model: 9700
OS: XP, 7
PIN: HEAD
Carrier: T-Mobile
Posts: 2,345
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

With such a negative attitude about lawyers and our justice system, you must have had a bad experience with lawyers and the courts. Regrets for that, but while it's fashionable to slam lawyers or insult the profession, on this Forum and thread, the shotgun criticisms of lawyers and the profession are irrelevant.

Remember that if RIM sues Samsung, it's RIM who retains the lawyers to represent them in court. The lawyer is not the one deciding to sue, RIM is the decision maker. This is the way it has been for hundreds of years.

In big business, high stakes litigation, lawyers merely advise and then tell the client the various options it has, from doing nothing to suing. Ultimately, it is the business entity, not the "candy loving" lawyer, who makes the decision to sue.

While some businesses will sue the competition as a business strategy [hence, they look for any way to sue, no matter how frivolous the reason], in IP cases [intellectual property], which is the subject of this thread, your point is misplaced.

In other contexts your "anybody can sure anyone for anything" statement may be accurate. In fact, I have said words similar to yours to many an inquiring client who wants to know if he or she will be sued or counter-sued.

*end*



Quote:
Originally Posted by kdo99
lol...asking a lawyer if RIM has a "case" is like asking your kid if they like candy.

you can sue anybody for just about anything in this country (i heard on the radio today someone tried to sue God for losing his job haha)...whether you win or not is a different story.

this case reminds me of the case where BMW sued Infiniti for using the letter M in their name (BMW's M-series vs. Infiniti's M35/M45). not sure how that went.

RIM is prolly just trying to differentiate their products to the market/masses and lawsuits are relatively inexpensive way to do so.

from a consumer point of view though, this is a pretty frivolous lawsuit. it makes it look like RIM is afraid of a little competition or worse RIM doesn't trust the consumer to differentiate between BlackJack and BlackBerry products.

makes me think twice about getting any RIM product (was considering 8800)...maybe i'll wait for the ePhone instead.

JMHO

Last edited by SanFrancisco : 12-17-2006 at 04:17 PM.
Offline  
Old 12-13-2006, 01:48 PM   #26 (permalink)
No longer Registered.
 
Dawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Atlanta
Model: 8330
OS: 4.5.0.138
PIN: 31a6c9c9
Carrier: Verizon BIS
Posts: 13,963
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

it was actually cingular not samsung who named it the blackjack its an i6something or another
Offline  
Old 12-13-2006, 09:06 PM   #27 (permalink)
No longer Registered.
 
Galvatron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mesa Arizona
Model: 8800
PIN: 240582A8
Carrier: tmobile
Posts: 647
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Still they would much rather go after a rival producer rather than a favorable middle mann carrier also they could easily prove that the manufacture prduced it an tht was the final model name BEFORE being distributed bu cingular
Offline  
Old 12-13-2006, 09:31 PM   #28 (permalink)
No longer Registered.
 
Galvatron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mesa Arizona
Model: 8800
PIN: 240582A8
Carrier: tmobile
Posts: 647
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peregrine
I disagree with the ip attorney. RIM doesn't stand a chance and needs to back off.
Blackjack is a card game or a weapon. Blackberry is a fruit.
What's next? RIM going to patent any device that starts with the word BLACK*...

There is no similarity.
And if anyone confuese the word BLACKBERRY with BLACKJACK then they must have been living in a cave for the past several years. BLACKBERRY is such a well known term...
actully that instance could win it for them

I'm reminded of a lawsuit of a few years back between wizards of the coast (which is a subsidiary of hasbro) versus Konomi. The lawsuit wotc filed basicly statate the the notorious ccg produce by konami Yugoh. Used a card type in the gam Called MAGIC cards. The was als an expansion called MAGIC ruler.
Wotcs prmary prduct is the oldest and longest running ccg called MAGIC the gathering.
Wotc the plantiff won the case

As a rusult konami was forced to stop using the term Magic card an was forced to use the term "spell card" and the set was to from that point on Magic ruler was to be refeerd to as Spell ruler.

Point is Blackberry black jack

The same thing is about to happpen
Offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 04:20 AM   #29 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Model: 8700
Carrier: T-mo
Posts: 162
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

In a related news, another Korean phone maker is going to release the MOKA phone.. Hey, it's just a variation of mocca.. you know..
Offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 09:27 AM   #30 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Model: 8100
Carrier: T-Mobile
Posts: 123
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdo99
lol...asking a lawyer if RIM has a "case" is like asking your kid if they like candy.

you can sue anybody for just about anything in this country (i heard on the radio today someone tried to sue God for losing his job haha)...whether you win or not is a different story.
To clarify (and add to SF's remarks above), I was actually speaking to the merits of the claim (which are present, I assure you), and not just chasing ambulances.

Also, keep in mind two things:

1) It will cost a company around a few million dollars to pursue such a lawsuit. So such decisions are not taken lightly. Suing someone for the heck of it is not a "free" activity, and is generally not done indiscriminantly.

2) If a company lets someone use a similar name or logo, etc., and doesn't try to protect their rights, it creates a slippery slope which can allow others to use even more similar marks, until the brand identity is lost. Federal trademark dilution statutes were very recently broadened (requiring proof of only a likelihood of dilution of a mark rather than actual dilution), so the government, businesses and the IP profession understand the importance of this, even if a lay forum poster does not.
Offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 11:12 PM   #31 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Model: 8130
PIN: 31B54365
Carrier: Sprint
Posts: 159
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I don't see where RIM has a shot. What is trademarked about "Black"?
__________________
--
Sprint 8130 (Amethyst)
Previous BBs owned: Nextel 7510, 7520, 7100i, Sprint 8703e, AT&T 8300
Offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 11:47 PM   #32 (permalink)
Thumbs Must Hurt
 
BMWLotAttendant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Model: none
Carrier: Verizon
Posts: 125
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanFrancisco
The issue here, with the word "black" in the name, will the public be confused into thinking they are buying a BlackBerry when in fact they are buying a Black Jack?
I agree with SanFranciso.

I'm a senior in college majoring in business. We are required to take a Business Law (431 level) class, and we talked about this issue.

SF is exactly right about the distiction between Blackberry and BlackJack.

Our law teacher (who is a lawyer and teaches for fun at the university), told us several occasions where this came into play.
One example: Starbucks coffee sued another coffee company called "Charbucks". The jury had 100 people surveyed to figure out if the public was confused as to which they were drinking? Starbucks lost.

I think if the jury figures out if they know the difference between a Blackberry and a BlackJack, an answer will be found.

And, if they are in different industries it doesn't matter if they use the same name, but in this instance, it is in the same industries in the same competiting market. So a case can be filed.
Offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 04:17 AM   #33 (permalink)
GMK
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
GMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Model: 8100
Carrier: TMO
Posts: 353
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

On the surface this dispute may sound frivilous to some but as I stated prior and as DrMoze put it in a similar, yet more legalese way, RIM must defend itself from anyone even coming remotely close to infringing on its intellectual holdings (read: trademark) or face the possibility of losing the exclusive use of the name Blackberry. This is what this action is all about.

There are at least three outcomes that I could predict:

1. RIM loses. Based on the fact that the names really are similar, the products are similar and there has already been major confusion, I don't think this is likely. RIM will have a pretty easy time of it proving that Samsung acted intentionally and in bad faith given the similarity of product; they look alike and the name is close. Samsung is certainly doing some hitchhiking here. They didn't develop the name in a vacuum.

2. Samsung can continue to use the name Blackjack but it has to fine print its marketing to state that "a Blackjack is not a Blackberry, Blackberry is a product made by RIM.....". This is a very high possibility. Samsung saves some face and RIM gets free advertising. Even though this is not an attractive alternative to either party, I would think its a high probability. Its easy enough that a judge would love it.

3. RIM wins outright and Samsung has to pull the name. Also a high probability. Samsung will have to do some penance.

Even though I feel RIM has the high ground on this issue they have already lost something. At least half of the people in this thread think that RIM is the "bad actor" and they are bullying poor Samsung. Right or wrong, its easy to view the plaintiffs as the bad guys, simply because its the way it plays out. I love to hate Mickeysoft and every time they go after someone I always root for the "David". Once again, right or wrong.
Offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 04:59 AM   #34 (permalink)
GMK
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
GMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Model: 8100
Carrier: TMO
Posts: 353
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanFrancisco

Remember that if RIM sue Samsung, it's RIM who retains the lawyers to represent them in court. The lawyer is not the one deciding to sue, RIM is the decision maker. This is the way it has been for hundreds of years.

In big business, high stakes litigation, lawyers merely advise and then tell the client the various options it has, from doing nothing to suing. Ultimately, it is the business entity, not the "candy loving" lawyer, who makes the decision to sue.
*end*
Come on!!

To state that, "lawyers merely advise" is fast footwork.

In a client attorney relationship the lawyer is the sophisticated party. While it is technically true that the client must give the final nod, it is based on the input from the attorney and what the attorney says, carries the weight in the decision to proceed or not. At the very least, every client, no matter the size of the action, asks the ubiquitous questions, "what are our chances, what should we do?" Legal advice often includes very strong opinion, at least it does if your attorney is looking out for your interests.

In the case at hand, the attorneys, both in and out of house, likely have said to their client, RIM, "in this case it isn't a question of whether to proceed or not, in order to protect your trademark, you have to go after Samsung." While that could be construed to be advice, its pretty strong advice.

While I believe you are defending the profession from the shyster label I don't think you have to understate the actual influence an attorney has in the decision making process.
Offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 05:23 AM   #35 (permalink)
GMK
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
GMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Model: 8100
Carrier: TMO
Posts: 353
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg
it was actually cingular not samsung who named it the blackjack its an i6something or another
Not true. Samsung calls it Blackjack.

Samsung BlackJack
Offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 09:45 AM   #36 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Model: 8700g
Carrier: t-mobile
Posts: 7
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I have to admit, I'm rather astonished at this discussion. This is the legal discussion forum and you folks don't seem to want to hear or give credence to the input from the actual IP attorneys. Do tell your doctors they're full of it when they offer their diagnosis? Come on people.

Likelihood of confusion and acts of actual confusion by the public are key points in a trademark litigation. I too, am an IP attorney, btw, though I don't spend much time with trademark issues. The fact that you-all, personally, are not confused is not the issue at all. You are not the public at large. You are sophisticated blackberry consumers and know exactly what is and is not part of the blackberry product line, down to the letter designations for each supplier. Of course you-all aren't confused.

The outcome of a case is never certain. Although I would hope and expect that they sought the advice of outside counsel, RIM is a sophisticated client and, at this point, should have a pretty good idea of what it's doing in the IP arena. They aren't going to be talked into a "frivolous" litigation by some shyster. They'll have made an educatated and calculated decision driven by both IP and business considerations, only some of which we outsiders may be able to surmise.

I will offer no professional opinion on the merits. I don't have all the facts (and if I did, I would probably have an obligation to keep my opinion to myself). As noted, however, RIM probably has little choice about whether or not to pursue it. A trademark certainly has use it or lose it aspects.
Offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 11:46 AM   #37 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
blakeatl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atlanta area
Model: 8100
OS: 4.5.0.102
Carrier: T-mobile
Posts: 1,686
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Blackjack is one ugly phone.
__________________
Build Your Business Even If You Are On A Budget.
Magnetic Sponsoring
Offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 01:06 PM   #38 (permalink)
Talking BlackBerry Encyclopedia
 
rjharary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Waltham, MA
Model: Droid
Carrier: Bell South
Posts: 238
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBlackBerry
And I always get confused between Lexus the car and Lexus the legal search tool....
Me too, they changed it to lexis though
__________________
Pretty good, Pretty pretty pretty pretty good
- Larry David
Offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 02:10 PM   #39 (permalink)
BlackBerry Extraordinaire
 
DallasFlier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Model: 9800
OS: 6.0.0.666
PIN: OT NOIR
Carrier: AT&T/Cingular/AT&T
Posts: 1,741
Post Thanks: 30
Thanked 20 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mendelec
I have to admit, I'm rather astonished at this discussion. This is the legal discussion forum and you folks don't seem to want to hear or give credence to the input from the actual IP attorneys. Do tell your doctors they're full of it when they offer their diagnosis? Come on people.
I've been watching this thread, but haven't said anything until now. I won't try to argue IP law with IP lawyers, it is what it is. Only thing I WILL say is I think the whole thing is rather ridiculous and an indication of what's wrong with our legal system if RIM now can stop a rival company from calling a device "Black[Anything]". They may be able to, but I totally disagree with them being able to do that.
__________________
Top 50 Year Win%: Nebraska-.785 tOSU-.768 Penn St-.740
Oklahoma-.740 Texas-.733 Alabama-.729 Michigan-.724 USC-.723
Dominance! The HUSKER Tradition!
Offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 03:23 PM   #40 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Model: 8700g
Carrier: t-mobile
Posts: 7
Post Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

It's a lot more complicated than that. By choosing the name blackjack, Samsung is, arguably, taking advantage of a name and goodwill associated with the Blackberry name. -Things that, unlike RIM, Samsung has not spent years cultivating and paying for. Moreover, the device itself, and the services associated with it, may not have the same features, quality and support as a Blackberry -nor will RIM have any control over what happens with the blackjack. If the blackjack turns out to be inferior in any way, is supported inadequately, etc., that negativity will flow back to the Blackberry name and harm RIM. -all because of the confusion in the consumer's mind between the two. It isn't so much an issue of the fairness to Samsung or others in keeping people from using a name of their chosing, its a question of the fairness of subjecting RIM to harm (actual and potential) while another party takes advantage of the Blackberry name.

RIM is unlikely to be able to stop any random product from being called a black___. You want to name your new hammer "the blacksmith," RIM isn't going to give it a second thought and the law is unlikely to give them the ability to stop you. When it's a product in a similar market niche though, it's another matter entirely.

I guess I see it the other way. In my view, it would be ridiculous if RIM couldn't do something about it.
Offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





Copyright 2004-2014 BlackBerryForums.com.
The names RIM and BlackBerry are registered Trademarks of BlackBerry Inc.