Alby_da_Wolf said:
Smashchu2 said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:
Smashchu2 said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:
HappySqurriel said:
KungKras said:
Who on eath trademarks a god? O_o
|
Someone who plans to make a product that uses that name ...
You can trade mark just about anything as long as the scope is limited enough, and trademarks are generally weak enough that all they prevent people from doing is making obvious copies of your product with very similar names.
Now, I wonder what Nintendo plans to do with this trademark being that I don't think that it is a particularly good "name" to use in English speaking countries. To me this means that it will be a subtitle to another product, a product only released in Japan, or a product that most English speakers aren't sure how to pronounce.
|
This! Just trademarking her is terribly short-sighted: I'll patent (and come on, trademark too, since I'm at it) Allah! 1 billion Muslims will have to pay me five times a day! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! 
Somebody suggested Jesus: poor choice, most Christians pray just once a week or even less... 
I got also a cool slogan ready: "NO PAY, NO HEAVEN, NO VIRGINS". O-)
|
You can't use common used phrases. This is why Donald Trump couldn't copyright "You're Fired!"
You can register a book called "Allah," and then no one can sell a book titled "Allah."
|
I count on USPTO legendary sloppiness about checking filings admissibility!
But Japan patent office must have different rules from USA anyway, because Amaterasu is a common used word amongst the Japanese as much as Allah is amongst Muslims...
|
That's what your missing: Amaterasu is being used as the title of the game. It's not like Nintendo gets money when ever you use Amaterasu. It just stops someone else making a game called "Amaterasu."
|
That's why I had the idea to patent Allah and its concept too, trademark is good to protect the name, but not to gather royalties. Patenting the concept of a deity made according to Muslim concept and its actual implementation should be strong enough, instead. And USPTO sloppiness is particularly legendary about checking prior art only amongst existing patents, countless people nowadays managed to patent objects and ideas already existing or known for centuries or patently obvious or undoubtedly generic just because they weren't patented yet. And in case of a lawsuit, legally demonstrating the Allah prior art or having it denied and the patent confirmed could just be matter of who hires the best lawyer (and the best theologist too ). I could even licence Allah exclusively to Shia or Sunni Muslims, it would be quite funny! O-)
|
Again, you missing the idea. You can only copyright something that is distinctive. This is why "You're Fired," was not granted. The "sploppiness" doesn't matter because it wouldn't be granted anyway, and even with the best lawyers, there are some stuff they can't argue (especially when it's clearly written in the law).
But here, I'll make it easy for you
- Copyright a commonly used name? No
- Copyright a commonly used name for a medium? Yes, but only for that medium
But of course, why don't you go out and do it. If it's so easy, you should be able to go and get it copyrighted.
