@thread

Android police comment (numerous dated updates throughout the drama)

Quote:

I wonder why nobody noticed that C=Holdings b.v. awakened and just released a press release in which claim that is the only company who have rights on Commodore trademark, moreover yesterday on OIHM website CBM's logo registration was blocked by an opposition. So I think that in the near future there will be a lawsuite between the two Commodores. Time will tell !

Source

Stay tuned.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@thread

Another post made with the link.

Quote:

The real Commodore just opposed the trademark filing of these Italians trying to sell an overpriced Chinese phone: https://oami.europa.eu/eSearch/#details/trademarks/013930276

Quote:

Grounds - likelihood of confusion

duh.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 12-Aug-2015 at 09:40 PM.
Last edited by number6 on 12-Aug-2015 at 09:40 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@thread

Confirmed.

Infringement COMMODORE trademark by CBM ltd, UK

Quote:

C=Holdings B.V. hereby announces that it has not granted any rights to CBM for making use of the COMMODORE trademark, nor that C=Holdings B.V. has any involvement in the development and marketing of its products. C=Holdings B.V. will vigorously defend its rights in this matter.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 12-Aug-2015 at 10:22 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@thread

Interesting to note who drew the statement up for C=Holdings B.V.

Eugene Van OS.

You might recall Barry speaking of him in 2011.

Source

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Interesting.It will be good case to see if Commodore Corp.
can actually defend the trademark to the extent they claim (again
the wordmark and field of registration are not identical and somewhat
confusing).

I somehow doubt that they waited for all this time , I rather suspect
that they were involved from the beginning but decided to do something
about it now.

Again , I don't see any products by them and from what I saw (on the
official UK trademark registration site) trademark was opposed much
earlier.We will see if this new company is actually smart now

@blizz1220

Quote:

trademark was opposed much earlier

There are two parts to this, if you read the link I posted above:
https://oami.europa.eu/eSearch/#details/trademarks/013930276

Trademark opposition filings are new, as in...days ago.

Those entries marked "CTM" refer to:

this

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Thanks for monitoring this for us. My faith has been fully restored in the C= saga.

_________________
Dammy

@damocles

Quote:

Thanks for monitoring this for us. My faith has been fully restored in the C= saga.

Indeed.

Just in relation to what to watch, how far they take this, and how soon any further action may be seen (takedowns):

Still listed with the new pics here: http://www.en.amibyte.com/

And, of course, the shop:

https://www.commodore-pet.com/shop/

This "news" btw is actually from last week. I just didn't spot until it appeared on 2 seperate newswires.
Source

#6

Last edited by number6 on 13-Aug-2015 at 01:54 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Trademark has changed slightly once before and I doubt
it was for anything other than legal reasons , then site went
down for a day or two.

It will be really interesting to see what Commodore corp has
produced if it goes that far which I doubt.Personally I'll be glad
if they fail miserably to protect trademark after what they did
for C64 cases.

@blizz1220

Quote:

blizz1220 wrote: @number6 Trademark has changed slightly once before and I doubt it was for anything other than legal reasons , then site went down for a day or two. It will be really interesting to see what Commodore corp has produced if it goes that far which I doubt.Personally I'll be glad if they fail miserably to protect trademark after what they did for C64 cases.

You have to remember that those behind C= Holding are the Super Wealthy and Global Elite(s). These are the guys who can, if it is in their interest to do so (ie they will make money), can generate hundreds of millions of dollars for capitalization. Crushing your business opponents is the norm because you do it to them before they can do it to you.

What we see as silly and petty, it is simply not worth the risk to them to be wrong and ignore something. When you are playing in their world next to their toys, expect to be treated as the real deal.

_________________
Dammy

@damocles

Yes , they seem to prefer to sue companies and get money
to making their own products.Still , it doesn't matter how rich
you are if you don't have law on your side in a court case (with
maybe few exceptions for prime ministers , presidents or oil
tycoons).

You can hire best legal mind on the planet to win a case and
still loose (in fact that best legal mind would probably warn
you that it is not in your best interest to sue).This is more of an
issue for new CBM , if they are in fact legitimately went through
all legal steps they have little to worry about.If you think about it
company that makes glasses might choose one of a 1000s of
indicative names and good ones may already be taken hence
those that are not used by companies to make glasses become
fair game.Otherwise you would run out of names and logos fast.

@blizz1220

One has to learn to pick and choose which fights to get into. I for one, would not walk up to the head of a drug cartel standing in his own house and piss on his leg. I know doing so will gain my entry into the Darwin Awards. C= Holdings has some very deep pockets, CBM UK better have the same.

_________________
Dammy

@damocles

I was gonna suggest hired assassins as an option but
somehow decided it wasn't proper

It would be first time that trademark was vigorously
protected in such a way though

@thread

Corrections are slow to come to the myriad of sites covering this story.

Slashdot has some comments though

If anyone wishes to correct/amend statements on the general "news" sites, feel
free to use the links contained here:

Nedfield starting with post #73

I think the link from the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission might convince them.

I see also that the lawsuit paperwork link has been deleted by terminills, so I'll repeat that one here:

http://www.crisona.com/iplaw/cases/12-cv-928.pdf


Heh. Forgot to include a little humor. One of the Commodore fans' pages, feeling the ownership saga had gone far enough:

Quote:

Legal Notes: The C= logo and name "Commodore" are trademarks of (SOMEONE!!!) and are only used here for reference purposes. OK, I cry ***UNCLE***!!!! I have changed the copyright notice on the bottom of this page AT LEAST FIVE TIMES, now! Will SOMEONE just BUY the Commodore name, and HOLD ONTO IT for a while?? The last 5 links I had have become broken! Sigh... Well, to WHOMEVER owns the Commodore logo and name, all rights belong to that party, and no infringement is intended... whomever you are!! ;)

#6

Last edited by number6 on 15-Aug-2015 at 01:49 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

the commodorecorp holding the trademark also is very convincing... if you go on their site and want to view the products you get errors

but in a way... fitting

@OlafS25

Quote:

the commodorecorp holding the trademark also is very convincing

You make it sound like a company when written that way, whereas it's just a website.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

a professional company basing itself on the old famous name "Commodore" with a disfunctional website? But they can do what they want like all the other not-related companies using old brands

Neither party appears to be backing down. Looks like if no agreement can be made this is going to court. So is C=Holdings like Amiga Inc. a case of trademark squatters, not producing a single product in several years, just hoping to get paid royalties or is there something to it. Only time will tell.

_________________
http://www.pc-opensystems.com

@RobertJDohnert

last news on site from 2013 and almost nothing is working

So I would guess yes

It might depend greatly if it's US court or EU court or even
UK court.Possible outcome may be slight change in CBM
trademark but as one company is selling products while
other one isn't (although trademark seems to be properly
registered by Commodore Corp but not for smartphones)
I don't expect court would just disregard interests of either.

Confusion applies to products , if Commodore corp brings
C64 to court and CBM brings smartphone I think blind man
could tell the difference.Also , if Commodore Corp made
smartphones later than CBM (their trademark could in
theory be used for smartphones or not , up to judge to
decide) then it won't be good enough.

Both parties are/have taken legal steps (why would anyone
register company in UK if their base is Italy?) and why would
Commodore corp wait all this time to start acting unless they
wanted more money if they won?

As for Asiarim I think they might still be waiting for their chance ,
one court decision is unlikely to make them back off forever.
They might try retrial or case based on new evidence.

Whole thing is idiotic , anyone who buys Commodore or Amiga
trademark is not a normal person/company anyway.If they had
factories or were hardware manufacturers then it would make
sense.