Nexus One Name Irks Philip K. Dick's Estate 506
RevWaldo writes "According to the Wall Street Journal, the estate of Philip K. Dick says the name of Google's new smartphone infringes on the famous character name from Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?. Isa Dick Hackett, a daughter of Mr. Dick, states Google has its 'Android system, and now they are naming a phone "Nexus One." It's not lost on the people who are somewhat familiar with this novel... Our legal team is dealing head-on with this.'"
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:5, Informative)
If they didn't trademark it, there would be hundreds of Chinese made rip-offs in months. You clearly don't understand how trademarks work.
It is generic word (Score:4, Informative)
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/android [reference.com]
Re:Obligatory comment on copyright (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Seriously though... (Score:3, Informative)
So is "apple", would you name your new phone like that?
Trademarks is all about registering common words for business purposes. And it makes some sense (at least much more than patents or copyright).
Another infringing greedy corporation? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Obligatory comment on copyright (Score:2, Informative)
I wonder if Isa is good in bed. Because whenever I'm reading Dick, I'll feel like I'm effing her from now on.
Re:Seriously though... (Score:1, Informative)
So is "apple", would you name your new phone like that?
Trademarks is all about registering common words for business purposes. And it makes some sense (at least much more than patents or copyright).
Eh, you don't know much about trademarks then. In general, the more generic the word is, the harder it is to trademark and the less protection you get. If you make up a word, that's better. If you have a non-obvious word, that's also better.
This is why you see businesses called "Kwik-E-Mart" instead of "Quick Market", or "Pentium" CPUs instead of "586s" (even if the CPUID does say 586 on it).
It doesn't have anything to do with the ongoing abuse against the English language, though it certainly contributes to it.
Capcha: Cohere
Re:Seriously though... (Score:3, Informative)
No, but I might name a brand of beach towels Apple, or ski boots, and what exactly would Apple Inc. or Apple Corps Ltd (remember them?) do about it?
There, fixed that for you. To clarify, and I'll type this really slowly to make it easy for you to understand: a novel is not a phone.
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:5, Informative)
True, but it's not even the same name. The book refers to the replicants as "Nexus-6" models. This is the "Nexus One" phone.
Would an average person think that the estate of Philip K. Dick endorses the phone based on that? Highly, highly unlikely.
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:3, Informative)
Trademark, not copyright. Copyright protects ideas, methods and invention. Trademark protects product names, product appearances and slogans used in advertising said product.
Copyright is established automatically, trademark must be registered for a fee.
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Obligatory comment on copyright (Score:1, Informative)
I think you misunderstand the sense in which GP was using 'should'.
Re:Another infringing greedy corporation? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:1, Informative)
Lucas didn't invent the term droid either, it's a clear abbreviation of android. Yet somehow he owns the use of the word in EVERY context. Anyone remember when Battletech was called Battledroiss before Lucas heard about it?
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:3, Informative)
US Robotics named themselves after the Fictional Company (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Robotics [wikipedia.org] , and also the foreword to one of Asimov's books. I think it was 'The Complete Robot')
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:3, Informative)
A quick perusal of the USPTO database suggests otherwise. A title is a mark, which is used in trade to associate a product with a commercial entity: whether's it's Windows and Microsoft or Rainbow Six and Tom Clancy is irrelevant.
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:3, Informative)
Except that trademarks must be registered, this was not.
And trademarks only apply to a particular use, a fiction book vs a smart phone are not sufficiently similar to apply.
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:4, Informative)
their greed feeds off the greed of the PKD silverspoons.
I think that if you'd bother to read about his life you'll find that PKD kids were not "silver spoons." In his lifetime, Dick won awards but was plagued by financial difficulties. Only one film based on a work of his was ever greenlighted during his lifetime, and he died four months before it was released. The financial success of PKD works is all post-mortem, and is largely the result of his estate successfully licensing his works as his works have become marketable later on.
In other words, the heirs you criticize were not born with silver spoons in their mouths; they were born to a writer who was unknown outside of the science fiction community, who hadn't had mainstream success, and took loans from other writers just to get by. His children did not grow up in wealth, living off a successful, creative father who sent them to boarding school, etc. It is because there have been films since Blade Runner, that the works of PKD have enjoyed success outside of the pages of science fiction magazines.
This doesn't make the PKD heirs' lawsuit right in this case, but you can't put them in the same boat as say the heirs of the Walt and Roy O. Disney, both of whom were ridiculously financially successful within their own lifetime and were able to pass on that fortune to their children, such as the late Roy E. Disney.
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:3, Informative)
Well they shouldn't have needed to based on the movie having "droids". They still would have been smart to do so because Lucas is rather litigious. But, Lucas apparently also abuses trademark law.
A quick look in TESS shows:
Word Mark: DROID
Goods and Services: IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Wireless communications devices, including, mobile phones, cell phones, hand held devices and personal digital assistants, accessories and parts therefor, and related computer software and wireless telecommunications programs; mobile digital electronic devices for the sending and receiving of telephone calls, electronic mail, and other digital data, for use as a digital format audio player, and for use as a handheld computer, electronic organizer, electronic notepad, and digital camera; downloadable ring tones and screen savers; cameras, pagers and calling cards
IC 038. US 100 101 104. G & S: Communication services, namely, transmission of voice, audio, visual images and data by telecommunications networks, wireless communication networks, the Internet, information services networks and data networks; wireless communications services
Mark Drawing Code: (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number: 77845682
Filing Date: October 9, 2009
Current Filing Basis: 1B
Original Filing Basis: 1B
Owner: (APPLICANT) Lucasfilm Ltd. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA P.O. Box 29901 San Francisco CALIFORNIA 94129
Yes, Lucas certainly does business with the Droid word mark in those goods and services categories. But for Motorola a license is much cheaper than lawyering up against someone like Lucas.
Plus I love the application date.
Playing Devil's Advocate... (Score:4, Informative)
Taking it a step further, since those posts aren't on topic in the first place, trying to bring them up in a forum where you know many people already have a strong interest and emotional association with the current state of copyright, such a comment elicits attention, distracting from the original discussion. That's trolling, although almost certainly unintentional.
Re:I Actually Side with Dick's Estate (Score:5, Informative)