- cross-posted to:
- brainworms@lemm.ee
- cross-posted to:
- brainworms@lemm.ee
TL;DR:
Semple, a multi-disciplinary British artist, promised to build “a brand new suite of world-class design and photography tools, with an uncanny similarity to the tools you’ve been indoctrinated in.”
“There’s a really urgent need for a suite of creative tools for creators that they actually own rather than rent. In a way, this first started when Adobe and Pantone decided to paywall the Pantone colors and I created Freetone — which was a free color plugin so creators could continue to access their palette,” he says.
“I have lawyers, and I’ve taken advice. We have solid plans in place. I would also point out that nobody has seen the final branding and no software that infringes on any of Adobe’s trademarks has been produced,”
“I have successfully challenged IP owned by Tiffany and Co, Pantone, Mattel, and others over the years. I feel we have a good and thorough understanding of where the legal line is and an ability to get as close to that as possible without overstepping it.”
Poor timing in light of the recent Supreme Court Ruling. Stupid name, stupid decision, all of that Kickstarter money essentially gone.
That’s nuts - if it was a bottle of alcohol meant to parody the brand that’d be one thing, but it’s a fucking dog chew toy.
Wether I agree with how trademarks are legislated or not, I don’t understand why anyone would expect that they could use another company’s trademark on a sold product, regardless of the industry they are operating in. It’s not hard to imagine people would be confused that Jack Daniel’s in this case, decided to release a funny dog chew toy, and regardless of the #2 wording being acceptable or not, Jack Daniel’s would have no way to ensure product quality to protect their trademarked brand that’s printed right on the damn thing. Supreme Court got this right in my opinion.