Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

249 comments

ROFL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935402)

Thanks, I needed a good laugh.

Re:ROFL (1)

Missing_dc (1074809) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935910)

I hear you.

I was wondering if today would go by without /. getting April 1st-ed.

A throwback to the Roman Empire? (2, Interesting)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935410)

I know this is humour, but it makes you think about how dumb things were in Rome at some points, where if you weren't nobility, wearing purple would get you killed.

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (5, Insightful)

Mursk (928595) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935568)

Not totally sure what your point is. There are plenty of places in the world today where wearing the "wrong" color will get you killed.

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (5, Funny)

Zedekiah (1103333) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935874)

If you wear magenta, however, you probably deserve it.

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (2, Funny)

irn_bru (209849) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936196)

Leave Glasgow out of this.

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (4, Informative)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935598)

If you weren't a noble, could you even afford a purple cloak? Today's purple dyes are cheap because they are synthetic.

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (2, Informative)

Deadstick (535032) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936108)

That's precisely why it was considered a royal color.

rj

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22936276)

You could still have been a wealthy merchant without being a noble - a regular pleb wouldn't be able to afford purple dye, of course, but a number of people might.

Also, it should be noted that only the Roman emperor was allowed to wear an entirely purple piece of clothing at all. Senators (that is, those from the senatorial class) were allowed a broad purple stripe on their tunics; equites (knights) were allowed a thin purple stripe. So even a thin purple stripe (much less expensive than full purple) could get you into trouble.

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22936576)

Doesn't this also apply to women?

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (4, Interesting)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935606)

Just to back that up, there is for instance this passage from the Penguin edition of Marcellinus's The Later Roman Empire: A.D. 354-378 [amazon.com] :

Next the affair of the [unauthorised] royal robe was investigated, and after the workers in purple had been tortured and had admitted the making of a short sleveless tunic, a man named Maras was brought forward.

Re:A throwback to the Roman Empire? (1)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936146)

Describe nobility. Nobility as we know it know is an invention of the Ancien Régime.

they have a point (4, Insightful)

seanadams.com (463190) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935416)

The title of the page has "t-mobile" in huge letter in magenta, as part of the words "engadget-mobile"

I could totally believe that a non-technical (ok, stupid) person might mistake this for an official t-mobile site.

branding consists of colors, words, typefaces, graphics, and this site mimics a couple of tmobile's elements. It doesn't seem to be a parody or any other such form of protected use.

Re:they have a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935474)

The title of the page has "t-mobile" in huge letter in magenta, as part of the words "engadget-mobile"

Except the mobile part of the "t-mobile" is gray.

Re:they have a point (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935480)

If you'd read engadget's article, you'd know that they changed their normal title artwork for today (Please check your calendar) as a formal "Go Forth and Procreate" to Deutsch Telecom.

Re:they have a point (1)

Iamthecheese (1264298) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936162)

So they're telling them to fuck off?

Re:they have a point (5, Informative)

Hubec (28321) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935538)

The magenta "t-mobile" is a temporary response to the letter (in legal terms I believe it's called a raspberry). Their standard logo doesn't look like T-Mobil's at all.

Re:they have a point (4, Insightful)

FiloEleven (602040) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935550)

You do realize that they uploaded that logo, the "deceptive" one you're berating, today, which just happens to be April 1? And that they did so specifically to spite [youtube.com] T-Mobile? And that they wrote a blog post [engadget.com] stating exactly their actions and intent?

Congratulations, you've been had.

Re:they have a point (1)

StormyWeather (543593) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936030)

Man, I'm losing my internet cred... I didn't even realize I was Rick Rolled [urbandictionary.com] until I read the goo tube comments. I actually learned something from a goo tube comment, someone shoot me so at least my kids get the insurance money.. please.

Re:they have a point (1)

Plaid Phantom (818438) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936188)

And you didn't even rickroll anyone with that link. This is serious.

Re:they have a point (0, Troll)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936038)

I'm just about done with April Fool's Day. It's hard to enjoy a holiday for Fools with George W. Bush in the White House.

How's about we make a holiday celebrating smart people with integrity?

Re:they have a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22936316)

Like christmas? This santa-guy would have to be pretty smart to manage visiting all the children in the world in a single night, and giving them all the right presents. And few would deny his integrity. Yes, christmas is definitely a holiday celebrating smart people with integrity.

Re:they have a point (-1, Troll)

arminw (717974) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936530)

.....It's hard to enjoy a holiday for Fools with George W. Bush in the White House......

So how many voted for him. Are they all also fool? Do you really think that if the majority had voted for Gore, they wouldn't have been more, or at least equally foolish?

Is there really that much difference between Democans and Republicrats once either one is in power? They both accept bribes (campaign contributions) from well heeled corporations and individuals. There will be no fundamental change until the money factor is taken out of all election campaigns. A snowball in hell has a better chance, than that happening however.

Re:they have a point (1)

conlaw (983784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936174)

I've been a T-Mobile subscriber for about 7 years now and am currently paying them for 4 phones on my family plan.* If asked prior to today, I would have said that "their color" was a shade of aqua-ish blue. When I went to the T-Mobile page after reading the engadget article, it was covered in that horrible magenta. Maybe they should rename the color to "OMG Ponies Pink."

*Now I'm sorry that I'm locked in for about 22 more months.

on that note (5, Funny)

nih (411096) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935424)

i just got a trademark on the the colour blue, watch out IBM!

Are they kidding? (2, Insightful)

Whuffo (1043790) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935430)

Trademark on a color? Next thing you know they'll want trademarks on letters or digits.

Any company that wishes to trademark a logo (or other trade dress) should be required to not use things that are already in common usage. Imagine if the American Heart Association went after everyone else who used the color red in their logo?

There's a limited number of colors, letters, and digits. Choosing one of those and expecting it to be unique is stupid.

Re:Are they kidding? (4, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935506)

Caterpillar has Cat Yellow
John Deere has John Deere Green

Re:Are they kidding? (2, Insightful)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935686)

The point is, I can paint my house Cat Yellow or John Deere Green without worrying about being sued by either company. Hell, I could paint my car that color. As long as I didn't try to pass it off as related to those companies.

And that's the problem... T-Mobile is suing Engadget Mobile for painting their house T-Mobile Magenta.

Re:Are they kidding? (4, Informative)

BeeRockxs (782462) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935708)

Noone is suing anyone.
If you had bothered to RTFA, you'd know that T-Mobiles lawyers just asked Engadget not to use that color.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

gdog05 (975196) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935792)

Could Slashdot ask anyone who uses #FFFF00 to remove it, because that's Anonymous Coward Yellow?

Re:Are they kidding? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935974)

Noone is suing anyone.


Peter Noone [peternoone.com] is suing anyone?

That seems a bit excessive.

Re:Are they kidding? (5, Insightful)

zbuffered (125292) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935862)

Usually when these things get posted to slashdot they seem pretty cut-and-dry, and I can't argue with your specific example, but there are some mitigating factors here:
1) T-Mobile's letter was nice (this shouldn't factor in court or anything, but...)
  a) they stated they were "obligated" to defend their trademark
  b) they specifically kissed engadget's ass
  c) there's no doubt that engadget's current logo infringes (this was done intentionally, as a FUCK YOU to T-Mobile)
2) Engadget Mobile specifically deals in the area (mobile phones ya know) that T-Mobile deals in

What if you painted your tractor repair shop John Deere Green? Or used it in your logo?

I'm not sure how this is going to turn out, but I'm not going to cancel my T-Mobile service that I don't have out of spite or anything. Bloggers can be whiny sons of bitches, just like lawyers.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

satoshi1 (794000) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935902)

Engadget Mobile sells mobile phones and mobile phone services? Or wait, does T-Mobile report on news regarding mobile devices? I'm confused, help me out.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

Workaphobia (931620) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936470)

Indeed. I expected a nastygram, but the letter was very straight-forward and, aside from presupposing that engadget would no doubt agree to the change, fair. Probably the nicest legal letter from a company I've ever seen posted online. The reaction was overblown and unnecessary.

Re:Are they kidding? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22936016)

UPS has UPS Brown

Note that in general, trademarking a color is specific to the business. Other shippers can't use UPS's Brown, but you can make a tractor in UPS Brown.

Similarly, other tractor makers can't use John Deer Green, but a package shipper isn't prohibited from using the color.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

cpricejones (950353) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936040)

Who cares. Let 'em have magenta. Now if they want fuchsia, we've got a problem ...

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

urcreepyneighbor (1171755) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936220)

Caterpillar has Cat Yellow
John Deere has John Deere Green
Cowboy Neal Cream

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

emjoi_gently (812227) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936332)

Well from that point of view, the Telekom magenta is a darker colour to the Engadget magenta. Engadget is not stealing the precise hue that T-Mobile uses.
Nor are they using the same font.
Both logos have a gratutitous use of excess dots, but in quite different ways.

UPS Brown (3, Informative)

MachDelta (704883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935630)

Believe it. "Pullman Brown" [wikipedia.org] " (officially "UPS Brown" [wikipedia.org] ) has been a trademark of United Parcel Service for a looong friggin time. They're pretty aggressive about protecting it too, seeing as how their whole corporate image is tied to the color so strongly ("what can Brown do for you?" etc.)

So unfortunatly, colors being trademarked is nothing new.

Re:UPS Brown (3, Insightful)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935754)

There's a difference here. UPS has trademarked a specific shade of brown, and protects its use. This would be like having the L.A. Dodgers try to trademark blue, instead of just Dodger Blue.

Re:UPS Brown (3, Insightful)

N1ck0 (803359) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935872)

Even if they do own a trademark on Pullman Brown, Trademark is not copyright. The prosecution of a trademark infringement is supposed to have to show customer confusion or loss/harm involved in the others business.

So if you paint your business car Pullman Brown but don't happen to deliver packages, haul freight, offer business supply services there isn't any reasonable harm to UPS. Now if you opened a store that was called the Unified Parchment Sales, and used a brown and tan logo saying 'UPS Store' on the front, you would probably be guilty of causing customer confusion. Most of the areas where UPS is hopefully in people using brown in similar packaging businesses.

Now of course these days people prefer the threaten, hassle, and hustle methodology of convincing smaller companies to give up defending themselves.

Re:UPS Brown (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935786)

There is a difference, those colors are specially formulated for or by UPS. It isn't actually brown, close, but it isn't. John Deere, AFAIKT does not have a trademark on "John Deere Green", but on the color scheme of green and yellow:
http://www.deere.com/en_US/deerecom/privacy_legal/legalnotice.html [deere.com]

Caterpillar has the same thing going for it as UPS, it hasn't trademarked yellow, but Caterpillar Yellow, not yellow, close, but still not yellow.

There is an infinite number of possible colors, any number of un-named color could be trademarked. 1 gallon of brown with one CC of white is a different color than 1 gallon of brown with 2 CCs of white. Sure, they're not going to look any different to the naked eye, but they are different colors once mixed.

Take some orange, add a little white and a little yellow BAM, new color.

T-Mobile, on the other hand, whether they claim it or not, cannot trademark the color magenta, maybe they can trademark a color scheme with magenta in it, but they cannot trademark magenta. The color magenta has been around longer than every single person alive today: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magenta [wikipedia.org] and a lot older than some shitty cell phone company.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

Naughty Bob (1004174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935658)

>Trademark on a color? Next thing you know they'll want trademarks on letters or digits.

This is quite a well established type of trademark. There's a brand of Chocolate in the UK which has successfully prevented other chocolatiers from using 'their' shade of purple. But that's kinda the point here-

T-Mobile is well within their rights to stop other companies using their trademarked colour, IF those companies are competing in the same market. T-Mobiles lawyers must be on crack (or maybe they are hoping for judges who are), because Engadget Mobile it a reviews website, and NOT a telephony company. Engadget don't sell phones, or airtime, and so there is no room for potential consumer confusion.

This litigation is doomed to failure.

Re:Are they kidding? (3, Insightful)

poot_rootbeer (188613) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935780)

Engadget don't sell phones, or airtime, and so there is no room for potential consumer confusion.

No, but they regularly enga(d)ge in phone reviews and commentary on the industry in which T-Mobile operates. They are part of the mobile phone business.

If Engadget were to post rumors regarding the specs of an upcoming T-Mobile handset, there could be a real risk of consumer confusion over whether the information is from an official T-Mo source or not.

T-Mobile's request seems perfectly cromulent to me.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

Naughty Bob (1004174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935830)

>No, but they regularly enga(d)ge in phone reviews and commentary on the industry in which T-Mobile operates. They are part of the mobile phone business. Trademarks don't cover that, the law's only about preventing a direct loss of sales which could result from such confusion.

Re:Are they kidding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22936164)

Perhaps they're acting very preemptively against having an "Apple" pulled on them. When Apple Computer was founded, Apple Records "let it be" (bad pun, boo, hiss) as long as the prior stayed out of the music business.

Now, who's arguably the #1 name in PMPs and online music sales?

Engadget Mobile is presently just a li'l website that reviews mobile products. Well, Apple Inc used to be a li'l microcomputer company run out of a garage.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

Naughty Bob (1004174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936302)

Perhaps they're acting very preemptively against having an "Apple" pulled on them.
Yes, that's what they're trying.

But just like the Apple Corps./Apple Computers situation, they won't be able to successfully litigate until Engadget-Mobile start selling phones/airtime.

(In their original situations, Apple Corps had to refrain from entering the computer biz, and Apple Computers had to stay away from the music biz. They were both allowed to use 'Apple', just as Engadget/T-Mobile can use magenta now. When the iTunes store opened, Apple Computers paid a bunch of cash, supposedly $30M, to Apple Corps for the privilege)

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

db32 (862117) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935666)

You mean everyday things like Apple and Windows shouldn't be trademarked? Additionally, trademarks don't extend outside of the industry, so AHA could only sue others in the medical industry.

Re:Are they kidding? (4, Insightful)

Klaus_1250 (987230) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935682)

It is not according to the European Courts. You can trademark a colour for a specific market (say, telecommunications). The problem is that many telco's now see the Internet as their market and thus assume their trademark applies their as well. Orange has been doing the same for years, threating websites that use orange on their website or in their domainname (yes, I lost my domain / website as well, because it isn't all talk, they really sue and are prepared to fight it to the European Court). So, no orange, no magenta, which colour will be next?

IMHO, granting trademark on colours is another Tragedy of the Commons.

Re:Are they kidding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935846)

Shurely the colour orange is owned by EasyJet? :-)

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

canajin56 (660655) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935688)

No, they are claiming trademark on "t-mobile", which is their company's name and registered trademark. The issue is that the website noticed that their name ends in "t-mobile", although the "t" is part of another word. So they changed just the "t-mobile" to be in "T-mobile"'s company colours. Its like there was a website called "Backslash Dotage" for some reason, and one day out of the blue they decided that just "slash Dot" would appear in teal, while the rest of their name remained black. One might think they were trying to call attention to that part of their name in particular? A trademarked portion, perhaps? And the "random" choice of colour might be somewhat less than random? If /.'s compalined would they be trying to say that they own teal?

Re:Are they kidding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935740)

Please tell me this story is linked to today's date (er... yesterday for those of us already in April 2).

Re:Are they kidding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935828)

Dude... what is today's date.
Moron.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

oscrmyer (568874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935850)

Its not trademarking colors its the theme that is being used. I mean look at the page it looks like a whole t-mobile add. Plus They are known for magenta. I am sure Victoria secret would have something to say if ford started to make a pink car that said "Think Pink" on it in a like font. I see both sides, also lets not forget the Johnson & Johnson v. Red Cross of something not too far from this. http://www.redcross.org/pressrelease/0,1077,0_314_6907,00.html [redcross.org]

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935852)

Barbie Pink (tm) has been trademarked forever.

This isn't new, there's plenty of precedent, and whether you like it or not, T-Mobile is on the right side of this one.

Re:Are they kidding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935986)

I trademark 04012008.

Not just color (2, Informative)

wsanders (114993) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936154)

The engadget people are dissembling. If you look at http://www.engadgetmobile.com/ [engadgetmobile.com] the logo, in addition to being magenta, looks like this:

engadgeT--mobile

I think they might have a problem.

Re:Are they kidding? (2, Interesting)

DrYak (748999) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936252)

Trademark on a color?


It's Deutsche Telekom. It's in Europe.
Here in Europe, the state sponsored university hospital tried to sue our local medical student association because we made a spoof of their logo for the association, this kind of stupidity happens. But, on the other hand, as this is Europe, not suit-trigger-happy USA, the suit wasn't allowed*, and the students even pulled a weirder spoof as their next iteration of the logo.

* - In most country were trademarks are valid, a company has to prove that you are confusing their consumer on purpose with your too much related trademark infringing material. Basically, you need to be actively phishing to get sued in Europe.

Next thing you know they'll want trademarks on letters or digits.

As far as I know, in the USA you can't trademark, copyright or patent a typeface, only its name and the actual file holding the data.
(Otherwise the people holding the Imaginary-Property rights of most fonts would basically control press, or force independent publishers to use "wing ding" to print their work).
Thus the name "Times new roman" is trademarked, the files containing those fonts for Microsoft Windows have a special license, but that doesn't stop Linux distribution to provide their own set of similar fonts (Thorndale, BitStream & DejaVu Serif, FreeSerif, Nimbus Roman, Linux Libertine, etc.) which looks very much like the original fonts.

There's a limited number of colors, letters, and digits.


Digits: And some people have used this reasoning applying it to computer code. After all, computer code is a big stream of binary digits. Back then a team of mathematicians used this idea to publish a number derived from a DeCSS binary with interesting mathematical properties.

Choosing one of those and expecting it to be unique is stupid.


It's not exactly that T-Mobile "owns a color".
The way trademark law functions, is that T-Mobile design a peculiar logo : fonts, colors, shape etc.
They trade mark that logo, and once they secure the trademark, they can sue whoever might purposefully try to use the same or almost the same logo to trick users into confusing the companies.

So what they are claiming against engadget isn't "You can't use this color, this color is mine".
What they are claiming is "Your logo looks too much like ours because of the color, and your tricking our customer into thinking your website is ours". (more details on this november post [engadget.com] )
And that will be hard to prove on a european court because one sells mobile service whereas the other only publishes tech news and reviews. Thus, the websites are hard to confuse. And even if some idiot managed to confuse them, Deutsche Telekom wouldn't be losing any money, as engadget doesn't sell competing products, nor any other product at all.

Re:Are they kidding? (1)

arminw (717974) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936574)

...Next thing you know they'll want trademarks on letters or digits.....

Yes lets get together on this. I'll trademark the letter "e" both upper and lowercase and you take the digits "0" and "1" for starters. How about it? Is it a deal?

Slashdot Participation? (5, Funny)

Kelson (129150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935434)

Slashdot could join in by reviving the OMG Ponies theme. Pink is close enough to magenta, right?

Re:Slashdot Participation? (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935890)

Slashdot could join in by reviving the OMG Ponies theme. Pink is close enough to magenta, right?
T-Mobile calls that color "magenta" but any normal person sees it as pink. It's pink. Clearly. Also, it's an horrific shade of pink, you'd be completely crazy to use it in a brand - unless you are indeed making toy ponies. The OMG Ponies theme burned our eyes, so just think what hell it must be to work for Deutsche Telekom (the pink thing just the tip of the iceberg there too).

One firm being that stupid is surprising, two is stupefying.

Way to Stick It To Your Sponsor (4, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935438)

Did anyone else find it uncomfortably odd that there was a big magenta T-Mobil ad [photobucket.com] right in the middle of Engadget's page as they "stuck it to them."

You know, refusing to host their magenta ads might be a better way to stick it to them ... or perhaps they were asking you not to use magenta so that users wouldn't confuse the ad with the site?

Re:Way to Stick It To Your Sponsor (1)

Mortiss (812218) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935640)

I am using an Adblock, you insensitive clod!

Re:Way to Stick It To Your Sponsor (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935642)

I didn't see that ad, but I find it to be icing on the cake, honestly. What's happening here is, at the very moment you're hating T-Mobile for being such asshats, you see one of their ads -- and thus hate them more.

And on top of it all, T-Mobile is paying for the privilege of being featured in an article on how stupid they're being!

Re:Way to Stick It To Your Sponsor (2, Insightful)

FredFredrickson (1177871) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935704)

Could this be a publicity stunt for T-Mobile?

Look out /. (1)

russlar (1122455) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935460)

I'm going to trademark slashdot-green.

What a strange day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935462)

All the stories seem like April fools day jokes but they're actually real, or so it seems... Is there a conspiracy going on or something?

Re:What a strange day... (1)

Wiseman1024 (993899) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935528)

Why does this look like a joke? It's perfectly possible, considering how far have our plutocracies allowed corporations to go. If the crazed bastards at Monsanto can patent living beings (guess the only thing they have still to patent is the "Enjoy your cancer(TM)" slogan), I don't see why a telecom wouldn't be able to patent a colour, or a person's name, or the way you rip a fart.

Re:What a strange day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22936080)

All the stories seem like April fools day jokes but they're actually real, or so it seems... Is there a conspiracy going on or something?
Yes! Yes! A consciousness conspiracy. Care to join?

Ok ok, (0)

v(*_*)vvvv (233078) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935512)

the color thing I understand, but look at engadgetmobile.com!!! I literally thought it was a t-mobile fan site or something. They high-light T-Mobile in the "engadge T-MOBILE" title, and that might push some buttons. I don't think this is just a color thing, because the mimicry is a bit beyond just color.

If it is the case that they exaggerated the color issue hoping the internet would go hooplah over it, then they are smarter than they let on... I expect they'll have a press clarifying their intent once some of the buzz dies down just to get another spot on slashdot. Of course, this is just speculation. I actually sort of *wish* they were smarter than they let on... because they let on to be pretty stupid :(

Re:Ok ok, (1)

v(*_*)vvvv (233078) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935600)

Oh, never mind, so they did it on purpose. Well, that will really help, because in protest it looks like they have made a legitimate violation.

Re:Ok ok, (1)

v(*_*)vvvv (233078) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935742)

"As a trademark owner, from time to time Deutsche Telekom looks at usage that could lead to confusion in the marketplace."
I have to side with the Lawyers (or at least the above comment). I have never seen this web site before, but it looks like it is a review/consumer driven site that in not necessarily corporate friendly, and I do see how some consumers (idiots) would confuse this site as being T-Mobile related. Of course give credit to the graphics guy for making such a corporate-looking site that made a mammoth corporation reveal its insecurities.

With that said making color the issue is probably the result of having nothing else to go on. Their design is parody at worst.

It's lawyers adding up hours / protecting the TM (5, Insightful)

jokewallpaper (449100) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935516)

The letter is a combination of the TMobile trademark lawyers doing what lawyers do...billing hours. Plus, they are protecting the TMoblie trademark. With Trademark law you must prove that you have diligently protect your TM by notifying parties of infringement. In every suspected case. With Endgadget there is no confusion or dilution of the TM. But, if someday TMobile has to defend their TM in court against another mobile provider who might use the color..they can haul out the big box of all the letters they sent to everyone who used Magenta and prove they diligently protected their TM

Re:It's lawyers adding up hours / protecting the T (1, Insightful)

damsa (840364) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935838)

Not really, if you stir up the pot then you are likely to lose your trademark status. Going after phone carriers probably ok. Going after bloggers who gives you free advertisement. Probably pretty stupid move both legally and in the business sense.

April Fools, right? (3, Insightful)

rossz (67331) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935518)

I'm looking at the calendar and thinking, "this has to be a joke!". But then I think about all the bullshit trademark/copyright/patent lawsuits of the past few years. I honestly have no idea if this is real or not.

So what does this mean (4, Funny)

Jodaxia (312456) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935524)

for Hello Kitty?

Re:So what does this mean (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935998)

I can hear someone learning to play the violin. Poik! Oh dear, sounds like they broke another string.

simple solution (4, Interesting)

hack slash (1064002) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935548)

Engadget should just reply saying "We respect your trademark for the color Magenta, however, we are using the colour Magenta."

Easy Fix (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935624)

Just switch to mauve.

Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co., '91, SCOTUS (4, Informative)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935632)

Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co., Inc. [wikipedia.org] is a 1991 Supreme Court case that said you can trademark a single color in certain circumstances.

Correction: 1995 (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935672)

Findlaw has the full text [findlaw.com] .

It's so obvious! (5, Funny)

SSNTails (1194501) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935710)

The real April Fools on /. is that the web server is probably running on Win2k3 for a day.

Unlikely they care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935748)

Just like the rest of these perennial stories, it's unlikely they care but it's a situation where you defend your trademarks or lose them. It's better to be safe and send the letter even if you expect no action on it. If it comes up in court later, you have support for your case.

Hehe look at the site! (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935750)

engadget has changed their logo so that the latter part of "engadgetmobile", the "t-mobile" part, is now all in magenta.

Hilarious.

alternative 'business' plan for corepirate nazis? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935832)

not very likely, as they are pretty much 'one trick ponIEs'. they have no use for anything that does not involve debt/disruption/laying to waste most of US. let yOUR conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE [yahoo.com]
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080108/ts_alt_afp/ushealthfrancemortality;_ylt=A9G_RngbRIVHsYAAfCas0NUE [yahoo.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A [nytimes.com]

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html [cnn.com]

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc.... as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US. gov. bush denies health care for the little ones;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html [cnn.com]

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html [cnn.com]

& pretending that it isn't happening here;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece [timesonline.co.uk]
all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles. talk about reverse polarity;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

Two words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22935878)

Viral marketing. 'nuf said.

Long history of this (1)

philipp-de (1154309) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935888)

Here in germany Deutsche Telekom has a long history of claiming ownership for the color magenta. They have sued or sent cease & desist letters to numerous companies using the color magenta in their Logo, Website, etc. Even companies totally unrelated to telecommunication whatsoever.

Free Magenta (5, Funny)

tijmentiming (813664) | more than 6 years ago | (#22935988)

Check out this website. It's filled with anti 'T-Mobile owns Meganta' drawings, pictures, comics and graphics.
http://www.freemagenta.nl/ [freemagenta.nl]

I especially like the one from Michael Wolbert (do a search for his name), somewhere on 1/3 of the page.

Nothing new... they did that in germany... (1)

w4rl5ck (531459) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936194)

several times before, always such hideous claims. German "society" told them "this is madness", but it doesn't seem like the listened. Or maybe, new management, new luck? Who knows.

Maybe if the whole WORLD shouts at them, something will get through. Or maybe, even not then. *shrug*

They also sued about telefone book names, colors, and other stuff. IMO: just stupid.

Old News? (2, Informative)

beadfulthings (975812) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936342)

Since this "Free Magenta" [freemagenta.nl] website has been around for several months in The Netherlands. Lots of food for thought there, such as what do we do about Gay Pride, the Pink Panther, and C*YK color systems? There are suggested error messages for users of Photoshop ("Sorry, this color does not belong to you!") as well as touching eulogies for good old #FF0090 -- or 255-0-144, whichever you prefer. They date the demise of magenta as a free color to 2007.

Dibs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22936358)

I got dibs on plaid!!!

they complied with the letter... (1)

thedohman (932417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936396)

I especially enjoy how they complied with the letter by making the entire site's theme magenta (rather than just the mobile news blogs), and putting forth the table to describe the differences between the companies, while at the same time making it look like they are laughing at T-Mobile/DT.

Pure Genius.

...and for those who go there, but don't read everything... the current logo with the final T of engadget combined with mobile... they explain that is just for today, being April 1 and all.

Why is this News? (3, Insightful)

ThePeices (635180) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936458)

Trademarking a colour is not unheard of, there are plenty of companies who have trademarked a colour. E.g. Cadbury ( the chocolate maker ) has trademarked the colour purple. But note that in this case, you cannot use purple as the main packaging/advertising colour in a chocolate product, it can be used elsewhere without issues. This is just more of the same. The issue will be whether the two companies are 'selling' a similar product.

Not too suprising... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22936536)

This is just about the same as when Apple wanted to patent the letter "i"

Yeah well, watch out!! (1)

OldFish (1229566) | more than 6 years ago | (#22936558)

I just trademarked pissing in yellow. I want a fucking nickel every time someone pisses yellow. Stupid sons of bitches.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...