PDA

View Full Version : Hasbro want to reclaim "Bumblebee" trademark | UPDATE: Looks like they won't succeed


Nevermore
2005-04-07, 11:26 AM
http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=76634431

As originally reported by Monzo at the Allspark.

[EDIT 07/20/2005] Looks like trouble's ahead (scroll down for a summary)

Link:
http://forums.transfandom.com/invboard/index.php?showtopic=30197

[EDIT 08/09/2005] Seibertron rumor mill strikes again

http://www.seibertron.com/sludgereport/view.php?id=5539

Cyberman
2005-04-07, 02:16 PM
Well, why not?
It´s not the best of names, but it´s a traditional name. I´d rather they´d reclaim names as "Ravage", though...

Denyer
2005-04-07, 04:31 PM
Ravage is probably too popular a name for whoever owns it.

Bumblebee? Expect a yellow kid-friendly character in the new movie.

Nevermore
2005-04-07, 08:09 PM
Ravage falls under the "generic" category, i.e. they can't trademark it as a standalone term, similar to "Jazz", "Tracks", "Hound" etc.

Roadstripe
2005-04-08, 05:35 AM
Well, why not? Among fans, the name 'Bumblebee' would almost be a literal goldbug...er, gold mine.

Civ
2005-04-08, 07:05 AM
Originally posted by Nevermore
Ravage falls under the "generic" category, i.e. they can't trademark it as a standalone term, similar to "Jazz", "Tracks", "Hound" etc.

Then why doesn't the name "Bumblebee" also fall into this generic category as well? I mean it's not like a name such as Optimus Prime or Omega Supreme where somebody had to completely make it up. Jazz refers to music, Hound refers to a dog, Ravage can also be a verb (or something like that), and Tracks referring to...I dunno...train tracks maybe. So why doesn't "Bumblebee" fall into that category either since it can also refer to an insect?

Nevermore
2005-04-08, 08:01 AM
IANAL.
Walky, Monzo or DustBuster are the experts. I merely paid attention to what they said about this matter so far.

Once again: Trademark is a tricky field. There is no "A + B = C". Unless you're a lawyer who has spent hours of researching into this stuff, chances of a tiny fanboy posting at an internet message board of completely understanding the mechanisms behind trademark law are nil. :\

guest
2005-04-08, 12:36 PM
not o pick a fight, but are you saying fanboys are uneducated, or that we merely can't graps concepts beyond "this character is the wrong color/name/has so-and-so's head?
~Colter92

Grimlock2983
2005-04-08, 03:39 PM
I think what Nevermore's saying is that copyright laws are confusing and difficult to understand even for those who have studied them for years (like copyright lawyers). Most people here probably do not fall into that category, even if we're educated, we're not educated in the field of copyright laws, so take anything said by someone who isn't an expert as suspect.

guest
2005-04-08, 04:52 PM
Yeah i know, it was just the way it was worded.
~Colter92

Nevermore
2005-04-08, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by Grimlock2983
I think what Nevermore's saying is that copyright laws

*cough* trademark *cough*

You can't "copyright" a name. If you could, anyone copying (i.e. writing) or "performing" (i.e. speaking out loud) that name would commit copyright infringement, which would be highly delicate. ;)

You copyright the content of works. You trademark names meant to describe and advertise these works. ;)

Thefallenone
2005-04-09, 05:53 PM
the best thing i have heard all week!:)

Ghirox
2005-04-11, 10:41 AM
:smokin: They want to reclaim the name, or they want to produce the Mini Cooper robot (that actually is a sort of custom work)? .... I suspect they are working on something like this :) :)

off topic: i saw a giant sized version of the Armada Star Saber, in a non-official TF Package (horrible paintjob) .... someone interested?

Nevermore
2005-07-20, 07:09 PM
Looks like trouble's ahead...

According to this thread (http://forums.transfandom.com/invboard/index.php?showtopic=30197) at Transfandom (http://www.transfandom.com/), both a company named Bumble Bee Productions, Inc. (http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=78544307) and an online retailer named Bumblebee Toys (http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=78467403) have challenged Hasbro's attempt to reclaim the "Bumblebee" trademark because they believe it's "confusingly similar" to their already existing trademarks.

Might mean Hasbro won't be able to reclaim the trademark. :(

Thanks to Transfandom for the heads-up.

Darth Zax
2005-07-20, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by Nevermore
Looks like trouble's ahead...

According to this thread (http://forums.transfandom.com/invboard/index.php?showtopic=30197) at Transfandom (http://www.transfandom.com/), both a company named Bumble Bee Productions, Inc. (http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=78544307) and an online retailer named Bumblebee Toys (http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=78467403) have challenged Hasbro's attempt to reclaim the "Bumblebee" trademark because they believe it's "confusingly similar" to their already existing trademarks.

Might mean Hasbro won't be able to reclaim the trademark. :(

Thanks to Transfandom for the heads-up.

but were those trademarks before transformers?
or isn't it: "the first one can keep it"?

Darth Shrapnel
2005-07-20, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by Darth Zax
isn't it: "the first one can keep it"?

No, you have to keep using it in order to keep the name, hence why Hasbro uses names like "Optimus Prime", "Megatron", "Starscream", and "Prowl", among others, to keep the trademark. Though I believe that the first two are theirs.

phoenixliger
2005-07-20, 08:34 PM
DC comics has a character named bumble bee seen on teen titans. Any way why should these companies even care Id say that there really after is money. Hey I could be wrong and they just want to be jerks.

Darth Zax
2005-07-20, 08:54 PM
Originally posted by Darth Shrapnel
No, you have to keep using it in order to keep the name, hence why Hasbro uses names like "Optimus Prime", "Megatron", "Starscream", and "Prowl", among others, to keep the trademark. Though I believe that the first two are theirs.

prowl isn't because that is a normal word (on the prowl, prowling)

Nevermore
2005-07-20, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by Darth Shrapnel
No, you have to keep using it in order to keep the name, hence why Hasbro uses names like "Optimus Prime", "Megatron", "Starscream", and "Prowl", among others, to keep the trademark. Though I believe that the first two are theirs.

Optimus Prime (http://www.seibertron.com/toys/fullsize.php?id=579&size=1&image=1) has an ® behind his name, which means the name is "registered" (i.e. Hasbro actually "own" the name until further notice). Same for Grimlock® (http://www.tfkenkon.com/g/?mode=view&album=Collection/act277&pic=dinobot01.jpg&dispsize=1000&start=0), BTW. :)

Megatron, I believe there was some trouble a few years ago with another company trying (but failing) to claim the name, so Hasbro has to wait a little longer before constant use of the name grants them the desired ®.

Cybertron Megatron (http://www.seibertron.com/toys/fullsize.php?id=577&size=1&image=1) is still just Megatron™.

Starscream (http://www.seibertron.com/toys/fullsize.php?id=571&size=1&image=3), however, is ®.

Originally posted by Darth Zax
prowl isn't because that is a normal word (on the prowl, prowling)

Which might be the reason why Hasbro are reusing it so often. The name might actually be quite tough to defend, hence they don't dare risking to lose it to begin with.

On second thought, no. Energon Prowl (http://www.tfu.info/2004/Autobot/Prowl/prowl.htm) has an ® after his name, oddly enough.

Zisteau
2005-07-20, 09:40 PM
Originally posted by Nevermore

On second thought, no. Energon Prowl (http://www.tfu.info/2004/Autobot/Prowl/prowl.htm) has an ® after his name, oddly enough.

But does that refer to "Energon Prowl" as a whole, or just Prowl?

RID Scourge
2005-07-20, 09:41 PM
Maybe it's just there because he's a republican. :p

Nevermore
2005-07-20, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by Zisteau
But does that refer to "Energon Prowl" as a whole, or just Prowl?

Does it say "Energon Prowl" or just "Prowl" on the packaging?

Rookwise
2005-07-21, 12:38 AM
Just says Prowl on my Energon Prowl's card. Doesn't have a tm or and r symbol next to it though.

Ghirox
2005-07-21, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Darth Zax
but were those trademarks before transformers?
or isn't it: "the first one can keep it"?

Hasbro probaby lost the trademark during BW, when they ceased to use it constantly, because they haven't a Bumblebee toy - in essence (it isn't like this?) they must constantly use a name to be able to claim the trademark, or they lost the right to use it.

Probably those trademark are after BW, and befor Hasbro try to claim the right again.

Darth Zax
2005-07-21, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by Ghirox
Hasbro probaby lost the trademark during BW, when they ceased to use it constantly, because they haven't a Bumblebee toy - in essence (it isn't like this?) they must constantly use a name to be able to claim the trademark, or they lost the right to use it.

Probably those trademark are after BW, and befor Hasbro try to claim the right again.

i find that funny because bumblebee is such an easy name to reuse in BW.

Cassettacon 27
2005-07-21, 02:22 PM
They should secure the names Megatron, Galvatron, Ravage, Mirage, Ironhide, and other fan favorites so this won't happen again.

I'll be damned if in the new movie they reffer to Shockwave as Shockblast

Also, BW Cheetor has an R next to his name as well.

Darth Zax
2005-07-21, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by Cassettacon 27
They should secure the names Megatron, Galvatron, Ravage, Mirage, Ironhide, and other fan favorites so this won't happen again.

I'll be damned if in the new movie they reffer to Shockwave as Shockblast

Also, BW Cheetor has an R next to his name as well.

since they named a minicon shockwave, i'll doubt he will be named shockblast in the movie.

Cassettacon 27
2005-07-21, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by Darth Zax
since they named a minicon shockwave, i'll doubt he will be named shockblast in the movie.

Good.

Nevermore
2005-07-21, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by Rookwise
Just says Prowl on my Energon Prowl's card. Doesn't have a tm or and r symbol next to it though.

I was referring to the link I posed above, to which Zisteau was referring before me. He could have answered his own question. :)

Originally posted by Cassettacon 27
They should secure the names Megatron, Galvatron, Ravage, Mirage, Ironhide, and other fan favorites so this won't happen again.

"Ironhide", "Mirage" and "Galvatron" are registered as of Energon. Megatron, as I explained above, they're currently trying to register, while "Ravage" falls under the "too generic to be deemed a distinct name" rule and therefore requires "strengthening" prefixes, such as "Batle Ravage" or "Command Ravage".

Darth Zax
2005-07-21, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Nevermore
I was referring to the link I posed above, to which Zisteau was referring before me. He could have answered his own question. :)



"Ironhide", "Mirage" and "Galvatron" are registered as of Energon. Megatron, as I explained above, they're currently trying to register, while "Ravage" falls under the "too generic to be deemed a distinct name" rule and therefore requires "strengthening" prefixes, such as "Batle Ravage" or "Command Ravage".

but how about alt. ravage?
i find it strange that they haven't acquired megatron yet, in almost every line there was a megatron (BW II, neo, universe and alternators didn't)

Nevermore
2005-07-21, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by Darth Zax
but how about alt. ravage?

http://www.transformers-universe.com/popup.php?img=Toys/Alternators/Pics/BattleRavage_BoxFront.JPG

Originally posted by Darth Zax
i find it strange that they haven't acquired megatron yet, in almost every line there was a megatron (BW II, neo, universe and alternators didn't)

Which I addressed a few posts up:

Originally posted by Nevermore
Megatron, I believe there was some trouble a few years ago with another company trying (but failing) to claim the name, so Hasbro has to wait a little longer before constant use of the name grants them the desired ®.

Orion1
2005-07-21, 05:55 PM
This may sound like a silly question, but couldn't have Hasbro kept the name Bumblebee registered, but not actually use it? For example, before Optimus Prime was callled Optimus Prime, he was called Orion Pax(or Optronix), then rebuilt, and named Optimus Prime by Alpha Trion. It's the same with my fan character Airlift, once he was reformatted, and given the name Airlift by Optimus, he was known as Orion1. Couldn't Hasbro have given a character one name, and say that he was originally known as Bumblebee? That way, the Bumblebee name is still mentioned/and or seen in print, and still belongs to Hasbro?

Nevermore
2005-07-21, 06:12 PM
Trademark law does not work this way.

It works this way:

You file for a trademark, then have two years to use it on an existing product in the field you filed it for (e.g. you trademark the name "Bumblebee" in the "TOYS" field, then you have to put out a TOY named "Bumblebee"). If you don't make any use of the trademark, someone else could file for the trademark, and you have a bad stand since you didn't use the trademark in the two years you had been given.

Otherwise, you could just file for a bunch of trademarks, never use them and then sue everyone who is using them. Doesn't work that way, fortunately. You have to USE the trademark. :)

Oh, and if you used the trademark within two years, you can prolong the "lease", so to speak. And after a certain number of reuses (let's say you put out ten toys all using the name "Bumblebee" within a certain number of years), you can finally register the trademark. In other words, it's getting turned from a simple "lease" into actual "ownership". I'm not certain about the specific conditions you have to go through to keep a registered trademark, though an ® is certainly stronger than a simple ™.

Orion1
2005-07-21, 06:13 PM
Thanks for the explanation Nevermore. It's a mystery why Hasbro didn't keep using the name, so they could have registered it though. Does Hasbro own the rights to the name Goldbug?

Ghirox
2005-07-22, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by Nevermore
Oh, and if you used the trademark within two years, you can prolong the "lease", so to speak. And after a certain number of reuses (let's say you put out ten toys all using the name "Bumblebee" within a certain number of years), you can finally register the trademark. In other words, it's getting turned from a simple "lease" into actual "ownership". I'm not certain about the specific conditions you have to go through to keep a registered trademark, though an ® is certainly stronger than a simple ™. They used Bumblebee so long, in G1, and released various toy with this name, but never try to register the trademark, and then lost the right .... this sound correct?

Nevermore
2005-07-22, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by Ghirox
They used Bumblebee so long, in G1, and released various toy with this name, but never try to register the trademark, and then lost the right .... this sound correct?

Trademark law was different in 1984-1993 from what it is today. Back then, no-one worried as much about "too generic" names, "confusingly similar" names and all that sort as they do today.

Orion1
2005-07-24, 02:59 PM
When the Beastwars cartoon/toys were released, couldn't have Hasbro had a maximal that was called Bumblebee, that actually transformed into a bumblebee? Sort of a maximal equivilent to Waspinator?

Nevermore
2005-07-24, 05:51 PM
Could, should, would. A little late to lament about things that didn't happen ten years ago, when no-one actually cared, no?

Orion1
2005-07-24, 06:21 PM
So at this moment in time, Hasbro don't stand much of a chance to reclaim the Bumblebee name then? The one thing I'm unsure of though, whenever someone watches a G1 episode on DVD, and the name Bumblebee is mentioned or he's seen on screen, who owns the right for him to be shown on screen?

Nevermore
2005-07-24, 07:04 PM
Once again:

Trademarks, as far as Hasbro is concerned, are FOR TOYS ONLY. For toys Hasbro want to put out tomorrow, next week, next month, next year.

Comics, TV episodes etc. have absolutely NO RELEVANCE to trademarks, and neither do trademarks have any relevance to the characters showing up in a comic or a cartoon episode. Especially not a cartoon episode or comic that was already produced a long time ago.

The only thing Hasbro won't do is giving characters in new cartoons/comics different names from their toys' (i.e. new releases, not reissues of older toys) counterparts, e.g. Cybertron Scattorshot won't be called "Smallshot" in the cartoon because Hasbro don't want to confuse their buyers. Sure, Voicebox got the names of Energon Downshift and Cliffjumper confused a lot, but that wasn't an active decision on Hasbro's behalf, if you know what I mean.

Even though Hasbro currently don't own the names "Bluestreak", "Bumblebee" or "Hot Rod", you'll still see them being referred to by those names in newly released comics (Dreamwave, IDW), because those comics are about the G1 CHARACTERS, not about the reissued toys. Plus, as I said, the fact that Hasbro can't use those names on toys has no relevance for characters appearing in a comic book, because "comic books" and "toys" are two different fields in trademarking.

And cartoon episodes that were produced 20 years ago have no relevance at all. I mean, you can still buy old G1 toys MISB on eBay and all. It's not that Hasbro are legally required to track down all those toys and slap stickers with new names on the boxes. ;)

Grimlock2983
2005-07-24, 11:20 PM
Getting a little off topic here, but i'm curious about something. There are trademarks (or some equivalent) for comics right? i remember reading somewhere that DW couldn't use certain comic characters because marvel still owned the rights to them; am i remembering it right? or is that totally wrong?

Dead Man Wade
2005-07-25, 12:03 AM
Originally posted by Grimlock2983
Getting a little off topic here, but i'm curious about something. There are trademarks (or some equivalent) for comics right?

Of course. There are going to be protections for creative endeavor, and comics are no different.

Originally posted by phoenixliger
DC comics has a character named bumble bee seen on teen titans. Any way why should these companies even care Id say that there really after is money. Hey I could be wrong and they just want to be jerks.

Slightly different situation, I'm sure.

Here's the deal: In the case of Bumblebee from Teen Titans v. Generation 1 Bumblebee, trademark is as much about image as it is name. Every TM application has to include how you intend to use the TM (in this case, an image of the character). Even with the same name, no one's going to confuse a 20 foot tall yellow robot with a woman in a yellow and black costume.

However, in the case of the toys, (which is what Hasbro is concerned about) having the name "Bumblebee" on the boxes of two toys is quite a bit more confusing. Especially to befuddled grandparents who don't know what they're looking for in the first place.

Jaynz
2005-07-25, 12:56 AM
Originally posted by Grimlock2983
[B]Getting a little off topic here, but i'm curious about something. There are trademarks (or some equivalent) for comics right?

Copyright, honestly, though it's starting to stretch it.

Any characters that Marvel created on its own (at the time) would still be owned by Marvel. That's why you're not going to likely see a Nightbird action figure, or a Devcon release... (Both of which were internal issues with OTFCC, actually...) There's issues of the originiators of the work, even derived, that are involved. In these cases, it would be Marvel Comics, Ltd.

Marvel created Jhiaxus, Firestar, Elita One, etc -- and there are rights (in the US), and Marvel had those rights first, even if they appeared in a licensed product. Hasbro cannot relicense anything based on the images therein without Marvel's permission - as a violation of their copyright.

They can, however, use the names for 'other images', such as RID Jhiaxus, which is an orange and white jet that doesn't physically resemble G2 Jhiaxus in the slightest.

Hasbro can negotiate and get those back, of course, and they have for a lot of things. (I think they purchased most of Marvel's rights on 'things introduced in the Transformers cartoon or comic', but I'm not exactly sure).

These days, Hasbro generally now also claims inclusive rights that they didn't use to , just so that they can own the things Dreamwave put into their comics, as part of the franchise 'branding'.

Gets a little confusing, I know, but I'm sure that Hasbro legal is doing everything they can to protect anything free that even remotely SOUNDS like a Transformers name. :)

Jaynz
2005-07-25, 01:01 AM
Anyway, as for THIS thread...

Does look like Teen Titans has 'Bumblebee' trademarked as an action figure ... which does kinda screw Bumblebee over for an action figure for Transformers - at least for now.

This is why Onslaught wasn't available in the past, as well as other names (Shockwave, Hot Rod, et al).

But the characters are a different matter, of course. IDW can certainly use Bumblebee all they want. That's a different set of IP rights, and the trademark of Bumblebee as a character is a different kettle of fish (and mostly falling into copyright law, or 'branding' trademarks).

Darth Zax
2005-07-25, 01:01 PM
ok, but what if simon furman created a character when he worked at marvel, can he still use that same character for another company, such as DW and IDW?

Jaynz
2005-07-25, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by Darth Zax
ok, but what if simon furman created a character when he worked at marvel, can he still use that same character for another company, such as DW and IDW?

Possibly the name, but not the likeness - and, depending on the character, the name itself would be problematic. That's why you don't see "Death's Head" in IDW at all, or why you likely wouldn't see 'Xaaron' brought over unless HASBRO secured it.

Dead Man Wade
2005-07-25, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by Darth Zax
ok, but what if simon furman created a character when he worked at marvel, can he still use that same character for another company, such as DW and IDW?

Only if he owned the rights, which he doesn't.

Orion1
2005-07-25, 04:23 PM
Don't individual creators own the rights to characters that name and design?

Nevermore
2005-07-25, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by Orion1
Don't individual creators own the rights to characters that name and design?

Not if they created them as part of the work they did under contract to a specific company.

Jaynz
2005-07-25, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by Orion1
Don't individual creators own the rights to characters that name and design?

Not generally if they work 'in house', the company owns the rights - that's part of the contract, which only makes sense. Can you imagine if Stan Lee said 'guys, screw it, I own spider-man, and I'm giving it to DC now for a few issues'.

Nevermore
2005-08-09, 05:00 PM
Everyone got their grains of salt ready?

http://www.seibertron.com/sludgereport/view.php?id=5539

Orion1
2005-08-09, 05:06 PM
It would be cool if that rumour was true, especially in time for the upcoming movie, and for the alternator :D

Nevermore
2005-08-09, 05:19 PM
I seriously doubt this rumor, considering we just learned one month ago that Hasbro apparently failed to succeed in trying to reclaim the trademark.

Darth Zax
2005-08-09, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by Nevermore
I seriously doubt this rumor, considering we just learned one month ago that Hasbro apparently failed to succeed in trying to reclaim the trademark.

well, we can hope, can't we?

Orion1
2005-08-09, 05:25 PM
True enough Nevermore, but it never hurts to be optimistic.

frenzy69
2005-08-09, 07:54 PM
Is their gonna be a problem in the movie regarding the use of the "matrix"?

Jaynz
2005-08-09, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by Orion1
Am I the only one wondering what this has to do with Bumblebee? :wtf:

I just meant that Siebertron's rumor on Hasbro suddenly getting the rights for an action figure named Bumblebee, after just having said that they didn't acquire it, and then already having plans for two 'near future' releases were... overly-optimistic at best.

Not strictly impossible, but pretty thin. Fun to discuss the possibilities, but I wouldn't say that this is a 'go' in any way, shape, or form.

There's a trademark search gov site, isn't there? Anyone got that link off hand?

RID Scourge
2005-08-09, 07:57 PM
Well, I wasn't going to postin this topic, but since you're promsing bananna splits . . .

Nevermore doesn't love me . . . :(

Um . . . Bumblebee? I guess it'd be cool to have that name back. Never was a big fan. His toy was cool, though.

Jaynz
2005-08-09, 08:17 PM
Well, glaze my nipples and call me 'Susan'... Hasbro currently does have the Bumblebee name....


Word Mark BUMBLEBEE
Goods and Services IC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: toy action figures, toy vehicles and toy robots convertible into other visual toy forms
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 76634431
Filing Date March 28, 2005
Current Filing Basis 1B
Original Filing Basis 1B
Owner (APPLICANT) HASBRO, INC. CORPORATION RHODE ISLAND 1027 Newport Avenue Pawtucket RHODE ISLAND 02862
Attorney of Record Kurt R. Benson
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

Nevermore
2005-08-09, 08:19 PM
You did read that bit?

Current Status: A non-final action has been mailed. This is a letter from the examining attorney requesting additional information and/or making an initial refusal. However, no final determination as to the registrability of the mark has been made.

Jaynz
2005-08-09, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by Nevermore
You did read that bit?

That... wasn't on the page I was looking it up on... TESS (http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=ucrvip.2.7)

I'm not finding the status info, though, other than 'LIVE'. Where is it?

Edit - Actually, what may be more telling is that I can't find another character Trademark for Bumblebee in the list of 27 that's brought up (and that includes some odd spellings, etc). I'm going to have to assume that the Teen Titans figure was not registered, and that this may trump it, and that's the issue being worked out.

Nevermore
2005-08-09, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by TFVanguard
That... wasn't on the page I was looking it up on... TESS (http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=ucrvip.2.7)

I'm not finding the status info, though, other than 'LIVE'. Where is it?

Page 1 of this thread, first post.

http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=76634431

Jaynz
2005-08-09, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by Nevermore
Page 1 of this thread, first post.

http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=76634431

Interesting, so there is no obstruction at this point - as far as another 'similar use' trademark is being used. Also interesting is that there's another attorney on the case now (post above) than on that filing...

Curiouser and curiouser...

Darth Zax
2005-08-09, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by frenzy69
Is their gonna be a problem in the movie regarding the use of the "matrix"?

hmmm, i doubt the matrix is gonna get mentioned in the first movie, but i think not, these matrices (as i think is the right spelling) are hardly the same.

Orion1
2005-08-09, 09:12 PM
I think that if the Matrix is shown/and or mentioned on screen, as long as it's referred to as the matrix of leadership, or Autobot matrix of leadership to begin with, then if later in the film it's shortened to being called the matrix, the audience should be catch on. Unless it's given a different name, but looks something like it did during the G1 animated movie.

Nevermore
2005-08-09, 09:46 PM
Don Murphy SAID that they won't be able to call it "Matrix".

Darth Zax
2005-08-10, 01:13 PM
you can remove the 'UPDATE: Looks like they won't succeed' now, nevermore.

RID Scourge
2005-08-10, 01:25 PM
Nope. The information that they got it was just a rumor. As of this point, they're still unlikely to get it.

So, where's that bananna split I was promised for posting off-topic? ;)

Nevermore
2005-08-10, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Darth Zax
you can remove the 'UPDATE: Looks like they won't succeed' now, nevermore.

When exactly did a "HE TELL ME" rumor posted in Seibertron's rumor section start to replace solid evidence?