this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2023
277 points (94.8% liked)

Technology

58012 readers
3094 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Does anyone else think this will go to court over copyright infringement? Purposefully similar name and same industry.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

mike rowe couldn't keep mikerowesoft.com. it's his actual name, too. no way abode is allowed to exist in any space remotely adjacent to documents, software, or media/arts.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Its trademark, not copyright. And it is deliberate. A lawsuit is likely to generate more value in publicity and news coverage than the case will cost.

That's why they deliberately chose an infringing mark.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I'm not sure its a sure thing for adobe (the established company) that this newer company is infringing per se. You need to do business with the trademark to 'use' the mark - the caption makes it sound like they will change their mark before doing any business? On the other hand, advertising counts as doing business where the mark is associated but that can get a bit tricky..

If we assume this is not an advertisement, then it's just like anyone else scribbling down the logo of another company on a sheet of paper and saying I made a thing

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I do think that they should pick a different name as theirs is very easy to mistake for Adobe. I had to read the headline twice because the first time it sounded like Adobe was taking on itself. I understand the desire to give them a "fuck you", but that name will just cause confusion that will likely hurt both brands.

I hope that "final branding" that no one has seen yet involves an entirely new name and that this one was just used in the meantime to generate publicity.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I read it as Adobe battling Adobe as if there was some inner strife. And I'm a pretty good reader, if I do say so myself.

This is so obviously stupid, because that $235k they raised will end up going straight to Adobe all because they wanted to be edgy?