*Beware* 'Merc Masks' are a Wolfram Creative LLC product line!!!!

I guess we understand polite and threat different.

Here is how that convo went.











Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

Lol @ that. Wolfram you do not have exclusivity rights to the name. I don't know why you seem to think you do.

opcorn

This is laughable. You're not winning anyone over, and you're not doing yourself any favors.

and to tell you the laws point of view:

generic terms of description arent even trademarkable.
and you havent even trademarked anything

by that definition, you have no right to claim that the term "merc masks" are only to be used by you. try trademarking it. wont work anyway. so deal with it.

guess why everyone was allowed to use the term "walkman" all this years back even tho sony trademarked it?
cause it was turned into a generic term of description.
btw sony lost all of its lawsuits on this one.

you have no grounds to stand on.
also you should stop arguing, cause youre not doing yourself any favors

WolframCreative said:

It has come to my attention that Gotham City FX in Lake Mary, Florida is using a product line name from my company, Wolfram Creative LLC, to promote a similar product of theirs on your site. Owner Selman Markovic has just recently been adding "Merc Mask" in his sales description on eBay and other places to confuse consumers, and divert traffic from my company with a similar item. It is blatant misrepresentation.

Click to expand...

Just quick note, GCFX was Banned from this site a while back. Consequently any representative of them appearing on this site, i believes constitutes a possible sock-puppet violation of previously banned members.

If all the rules are to be followed, we must assume that your target audience will not at all hear your plea, as GCFX has not been allowed to operate on therpf for some time.

What you kinda are doing, as a side effect is exposing possible sock-puppets or shill accounts.

Regarding what might or might not be considered "fair use":

The determination of "fair use" would normally be determined by a historical observation of the item in question, in essence, if this were a court or otherwise official determining body, the history of the terms "merc mask" will be brought into question.

Can the originator of the phrase "merc mask" prove they have original creative conception of the phrase?

This will be the first question asked.

The next question that will be asked is if "Merc Mask" can be trademarked, it cannot be copywrighted and will not follow copywright rules.

I am going to go out on a limb and say that the presence of the space in the name "Merc Mask" will be identified as a descriptive article, rather than a trade used name.

The trade used name must be identifiable by the parent creator of the name, TMs like "bell atlantic" or "verizon wireless" can occupy that domain, because part of the TM has a wholly used TM name. Verizon would not be able to sue for infringement of the word "wireless" but they can for "verizon" same thing goes for the combination of "bell atlantic" which cannot be construed as a descriptive product phrase, but as the TM and licenced company name.

In OPs case, the separation of merc and mask in this case is a descriptive product name, and would "most" likely be looked at as such and not as a TM type of name.

Now had the name been "mercmask" there is something different entirely.

Also, note that in civil suits, the legitimacy of the product as represented by a TM is irrelevant.

Has he stolen your actual product, or just the name of your product? If he is recasting your product then he needs to stop, and be reported. But unfortunately, if he is using your product name (and if you don't have it copyrighted) you really can't do anything about it.... People unfortunately have the option to call their products whatever they want if the name they are using is not copyrighted......
It isn't what I would consider morally correct though... Because in theory it is still trying to draw attention to yourself by using other peoples hard work. But man, it's just going to be hard for you to try to get him to change it, because it isn't technically illegal....

You cant trademark a generic description, not in U.S.A or any other place, that is like attempting to trademark assasin´s mask, soldier helmet and etc etc, generic descriptions

Guille said:

You cant trademark a generic description, not in U.S.A or any other place, that is like attempting to trademark assasin´s mask, soldier helmet and etc etc, generic descriptions

Click to expand...

In Short

Guille said:

You cant trademark a generic description, not in U.S.A or any other place, that is like attempting to trademark assasin´s mask, soldier helmet and etc etc, generic descriptions

Click to expand...

Precisely. That's like trying to trademark the word "action figure".......

Well Wolfram, I hate to break it to you, but after reading through all the messages you sent AND reading through this entire post, you really can't do anything, and you really shouldn't be able to do anything, and it really isn't even unfortunate that you CAN'T do anything because it would be stupid if you could. The term "Merc Mask" should and could be used by anyone that wants to use it. It's not copyrighted, and they can use it whenever and wherever they please.

so whatever ended up happening here?

I'm going to presume he flounced.

I don't believe there is much choice. As previously stated by others, there really is no right here for Wolfram to claim was violated. I feel for the guy, but when you really break it down, isn't he adding the description to garner attention for his product, essentially ripping off DC/marvel's original name? I don't believe he can be mad that someone else did this, or even did it to him directly.

Unless recasting is taking place, I don't see an issue.

id say it is really jacked up how another company is using "merk" to garner attention but whatever the argument is here id like ta say im still happy and glad wolframcreative has an awesome set of products. in other words..... im a wolframcreative customer whether or not he wins the case.

Wolframe, I'm sorry, but you're kinda being a jerk in this situation.

Adapt and drive on. You're wasting your breath and other people's time. If they're recasting your work, that's a whole separate issue, but the fact that others are using a common term that you have since, what? 2012? How old are you? You have no justification to challenge others in this. And no, "selling your products" based on an already copywrite IP is not an excuse. Yea, you may paint them different schemes, but the basline is that these are based of the DeathStroke character, which is not your original creation, therefore, you challenging someone else's labeling over this is just plain stupid. Cut your "apparent" losses....you're making yourself look bad....

This is a great example of why IP is so tricky. One of the conversations in my MBA class was how Google is in big danger of losing their IP because of the term "google/googling" becoming so common place to refer to any search on the internet. Ah well ...

Similar thing happened with the term "Flash on Clash" regarding lightsabers. Don't even want to go into the pissing/who's is bigger match which occurred involving that one.

I saw something similiar with some saying that a person had made a similiar movie inspired helmet and were selling it making good sales. The user was furious, just because someone was doing the same thing as them with more success.
Got a cheek really when 99% of the things we all make here are honestly, a rip off of something. I think this is silly, if they haven't literally taken something youve made moulded it and are casting copies, then its their work, they are as free to do with it as you are with your work.

lol:lol