The PTO has denied Urban Trend LLC's application for a Bitcoin trademark.
Urban Trend, a household product company located in California, was unable to address the opposition from Russ Smith regarding their patent. Smith, who owns Atlantic City Bitcoin and has affiliations with LLC and HELP.ORG LLC, had already formed his opinion on the matter prior to this.
According to the application, Smith, who is the registered owner of the trademark "Milly Bitcoin," accused Urban Trend of fraudulence during their submission of the application to register the "Bitcoin" trademark.
Given the current monumental problems faced by the Bitcoin community, a dispute at this moment is unnecessary.
Urban Trend LLC, the defendant, responded to an office action by explaining the importance of BITCOIN to their application.
The defendant's response was that BITCOIN held no importance. However, the defendant neglected to mention that "BI
...TCOIN" simply describes a quality of the applicant's products. Specifically, "BITCOIN" indicated that the items would be labeled with logos related to the Bitcoin currency.
As a result, the motion effectively dismissed Urban Trend's attempt to secure the "Bitcoin" trademark. Additionally, Smith emphasized in his motion the remarkable likenesses in the business nature between his company and Urban Trend.
According to him, this will result in more confusion among customers when they choose to approach either company.
After being notified by the opposition, the PTO quickly issued instructions to both parties and asked for a response by January 26th, 2015.
Due to the defendant's failure to respond, the allegations were found to be valid.
Despite being informed about the accusations and arguments made by Smith, the defendant chose not to respond. This decision enabled Smith to seek a default judgment in their favor, which
ultimately resulted in the final verdict for the dispute.
There has been a longstanding tradition in the industry of trademarking Bitcoin, with at least 35 trademarks including the word Bitcoin reported in the United States. Those currently involved are familiar with this practice.
Despite this, the unofficial Bitcoin advocacy group disagrees with the concept of trademarking the digital currency. Their argument is that "BITCOIN" should be treated as a common term, just like other currencies such as "dollar," "euro," and "yen." The Foundation's goal is to protect the term "BITCOIN" for public use.
- Business Law essays
- Contract essays
- Consumer Protection essays
- Property essays
- Ownership essays
- Agreement essays
- Common Law essays
- Contract Law essays
- Justice essays
- Security essays
- Tort Law essays
- United States Constitution essays
- Crime essays
- Lawsuit essays
- Treaty essays
- Family Law essays
- Marijuana Legalization essays
- Constitution essays
- War on Drugs essays
- Court essays
- Jury essays
- Police essays
- Protection essays
- Community Policing essays
- Criminal Law essays
- Judge essays
- Lawyer essays
- Employment Law essays
- Copyright Infringement essays
- Injustice essays
- Intellectual Property essays
- Breach Of Contract essays
- Jurisprudence essays
- Social Injustice essays
- Juvenile Justice essays
- Internet Privacy essays
- Cyber Security essays
- Bill Of Rights essays
- Civil Liberties essays
- First Amendment To The United States Constitution essays
- Fourth Amendment To The United States Constitution essays
- Second amendment essays
- Animal Cruelty essays
- Law Enforcement essays
- Juvenile Justice System essays
- Surveillance essays
- Forensic Science essays
- Crime Prevention essays
- Criminal Justice essays
- Criminology essays
