
Candy Crush Saga creators have trademarked the word “candy” - danso
http://www.gamezebo.com/news/2014/01/20/king-has-trademarked-word-candy-and-youre-probably-infringing
======
will_brown
Lawyer here. I once received a C&D letter for my business, vblood.com, a
vampire themed energy drink from a competitor claiming they owned the TM
rights to "blood" for beverages. That was a little different they filed the TM
in the wrong category and I claimed defense of "descriptive use" how else
would a blood themed beverage be described?

However, the Candy Crush Saga creators are even further behind the 8-ball on
the TM "Candy" vis-a-vis video games. Why? Hasbro (one of the largest toy
makers in the world) filed a TM for "Candy Land" \- for interactive video
games, in addition to many other TM categories - well before Candy Crush even
existed. See:
[http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:el5e10...](http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:el5e10.2.23)

It would be very difficult to maintain their legal argument (i.e. "Candy
Slots" is likely to cause confusion with their TM "Candy") and simultaneously
argue that "Candy" does not create likelihood of confusion with "Candy Land".

Advice: See a Lawyer and protect your rights.

Edit: USPTO does not permit a direct link to TMs, and the above link probably
errors.
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/4lzhe7ah9t8fae3/Candyland.pdf](https://www.dropbox.com/s/4lzhe7ah9t8fae3/Candyland.pdf)

Edit 2: The 1st Dropbox link is a link to a "cancelled" TM, this is the
current "Candy Land" TM registration for video games.
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/ev2wpx9o6bu1grc/candy%20land.pdf](https://www.dropbox.com/s/ev2wpx9o6bu1grc/candy%20land.pdf)

~~~
bertil
Thank you for that — it's a shame someone belonging to the same professional
group as you advised King to do something stupid and provocative. I really
wish sanctions from Bar associations were stronger when it comes to empowering
large clients to bully others in spite of common sense.

~~~
jug6ernaut
I don't know that I would agree that this should be an issue against those
practicing law. While I think we can all agree that its unethical, it is
within the law as it is now. We could go on all day blaming the lawyers, but
they are not the source of the problem. Only one of many results of a system
that has its flaws.

~~~
belorn
Members of bar associations are often required to follow a set of ethics.

Doing unethical (but legal) is already something that bar associations will
sanction against. The only question is what each bar association consider
unethical.

------
DannyBee
IP lawyer here:

No, they haven't trademarked it.

They've applied for one.

It's been approved for publication in the official gazette.

It is now on step 11 of
[http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/process/](http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/process/)

This means anyone who wants to object now has 30 days to object to the mark.
You can imagine they will, given how broadly they claim this mark (plus the
examiner should have objected)

So basically, rather than complain and write articles, now is exactly the
right time to file an objection to the mark.

The USPTO site makes this clear: "Approved by the examining attorney for
publication but has not yet published for opposition. Although rare,
withdrawal of approval prior to publication may occur after final review. The
opposition period begins on the date of publication."

If you want the exact status:
[http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=85842584&caseType=SERIAL_N...](http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=85842584&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch)

Also note: The basis is that it is based on a foreign filing (which means they
also filed somewhere else other than the US)

~~~
brazzy
Wait... they started harassing people about a trademark that is _not yet
granted_ but in a phase where _people can object to its granting_??

That sounds like a monumentally stupid thing to do... wouldn't the sensible
thing be to keep as quiet as possible about it exactly during this step?

~~~
DannyBee
The foreign filing may have issued (i didn't look at the time), so they may
have a valid trademark somewhere already.

------
mikeryan
_Think of Apple, for example. Nobody is going to expect the electronics giant
to lay claim over the fruit, but if someone were to try to market an
electronic device under that name, you’d better believe their lawyers would
swoop in._

Ironically the reverse happened. Apple always had an uneasy trademark
situation with Apple Corps (A holding company owned by the Beatles which owns
Apple Records). Apple kept "entering the music business" and having to buy off
Apple Corps to keep their mark intact.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer)

~~~
vacri
Apple tried to prevent a supermarket chain here in Australia from using a logo
which stylised their "W" as an apple, one that looked nothing like Apple's
apple.

~~~
Crito
For anybody who doesn't remember, it was Woolworths:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Woolworths_logo_2012.svg](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Woolworths_logo_2012.svg)

Not to be confused with _Woolworth_ (no 's'), the old American retail store.
Somewhat ironically, Woolworth _s_ was named after Woolworth, though the
companies are not related:

> _" The name on the draft prospectus drawn up by Cecil Scott Waine was
> "Wallworths Bazaar" – a play on the F.W. Woolworth name (the owner of the
> Woolworth's chain in the United States and United Kingdom). However,
> according to Ernest Robert Williams, Percy Christmas dared him to register
> the name Woolworths instead, which he succeeded in doing after finding out
> the name was available for use in New South Wales. Accordingly, Woolworths
> Ltd in Australia has no connection with the F.W. Woolworth Company in the
> United States, nor the Woolworths Group of UK."_

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolworths_Limited](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolworths_Limited)

------
psykotic
Funny. Brian Hook developed a game 12 years ago called Candy Cruncher with
nearly identical naming, visuals and gameplay:
[http://www.pyrogon.com/games/candycruncher/](http://www.pyrogon.com/games/candycruncher/)

Edit: He just said he successfully filed for the Candy Cruncher trademark in
2002.
[http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn78164603&docId...](http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn78164603&docId=SPE20080626201942#docIndex=0&page=1)

~~~
easy_rider
Doesn't matter who's first. But who's got the first patent.

He could get sued.

~~~
basseq
Patents and trademarks are different things, but I think in either case the
idea of "prior art" would apply. In the U.S., you're granted a trademark
automatically upon use. Brian should be able to say, "I've been using this
since 2009" and be afforded at least a degree of protection. Of course, it's a
lot harder to defend in court without a formal trademark, so he might not
choose to litigate.

------
jxf
I hope Crush [0] sues them for trademark infringement and gives them a taste
of their own medicine.

[0] [http://www.crushsoda.com/](http://www.crushsoda.com/)

~~~
vonmoltke
Hasbro[1] should join the party, especially since they are in the electronic
games market.

[1] [http://www.hasbro.com/games/en_US/shop/browse/Hasbro-
Games/C...](http://www.hasbro.com/games/en_US/shop/browse/Hasbro-Games/Candy-
Land/_/N-1rZ38Z3mZgt/Ne-2l)

~~~
talmand
Oddly enough, there's already an app called "Candy Land" that has nothing to
do with the board game.

------
skymt
I'm a little sympathetic to King here because of the degree to which other
developers have ripped off Candy Crush. A couple minutes searching the app
store for "candy" turned up five examples ranging from "strongly based on" to
"deliberately sowing confusion." One describes itself as a "popular candy
'match 3' game," another even uses the distinctive Candy Crush UI font.

But of course they throw away any sympathy by going after totally unrelated
games. Did any player actually think they had downloaded a Candy Crush slot
game?

~~~
codyb
Isn't Candy Crush just a rip off of Bejeweled though?

~~~
skymt
It's very similar, though there are some significant gameplay differences. But
from a visual perspective, compare Bejeweled[0] and Candy Crush[1], then look
at Action Candy Swap HD Pro[2].

[0]:
[http://appshopper.com/games/bejeweled](http://appshopper.com/games/bejeweled)

[1]: [http://appshopper.com/games/candy-crush-
saga-%C2%AE](http://appshopper.com/games/candy-crush-saga-%C2%AE)

[2]: [http://appshopper.com/games/action-candy-swap-hd-
pro](http://appshopper.com/games/action-candy-swap-hd-pro)

~~~
jmduke
That third link is incredible; they've made a cottage industry out of match-3
clones. Not only _Action Candy Swap_ , but _Action Candy Shift_ , _Action
Jewel Matching_ , and _Amazing Fruit Shift_ \-- all of which seem to be clones
of the same game with different sprites and verbiage.

~~~
rhizome
I imagine the business model is the repackage the same thing under as many
search term combinations as they can think that people would try to find a
game like this. In food terms, like a restaurant advertising the same thing
as, "BBQ," "Smoked Meat," "Southern Grill Food," "St. Louis Pork," "Tailgate
Plate," etc. It's just pushing SEO into the actual name of the game.

~~~
thaumasiotes
> It's just pushing SEO into the actual name of the game.

I agree that that's likely the main idea, but there's real value in providing
different themes. I like jewels more than I like candy art.

~~~
rhizome
Who searches for games based on the thematic metaphor? I think it's more
likely that people search for Bejeweled or Candy Crush, and unscrupulous and
uncreative game creators want to muddy the waters and siphon off some of that
money.

------
pbhjpbhj
There's a general principle of prior use as an absolute defence in trademark
law - though it wouldn't surprise me to much to find that USA had violated
that principle.

Candy is too generic in both the software field and the game field to be a
distinctive mark and so shouldn't be granted as a word mark; trademark
examiner fail. I mean come on.

[http://www.girlgames.com/kittys-
candies.html](http://www.girlgames.com/kittys-candies.html) from 2011.

[http://www.primarygames.com/puzzles/strategy/candybags/](http://www.primarygames.com/puzzles/strategy/candybags/)
from 2008.

[http://www.cookinggames.com/minas-popping-
candies.html](http://www.cookinggames.com/minas-popping-candies.html) from
2011; almost an exact match for Candy Crush from King.com Limited.

"Candy" thus would confuse people as to the origin because of this lack of
distinctiveness and widespread prior use in games and in apps.

The dates for these prior uses are from Google and hence can't be relied on
but better dates could be acquired. This search took 5 minutes at most.

------
dkulchenko
They're just asking for one of their lucky cease-and-desist recipients to
countersue and strip them of the right to use their own trademark, forcing
them to rename their game.

It's happened before. Seems like a risky and stupid decision on their part.

------
otsdr
Title and controversy aside, can anyone read this phrase while keeping a
straight face?

 _“Lots of devs are frustrated cause it seems so ridiculous” says Benny Hsu,
the maker of All Candy Casino Slots – Jewel Craze Connect: Big Blast Mania
Land._

~~~
welly
Snappy game title.

------
mildtrepidation
Also worth noting: The developer cited mentions at the end of the article that
he was informed at some point that he also couldn't use the word "memory."
Which, obvious ridiculousness of this whole matter aside, makes me wonder if
there's any concise and complete resource one can use to check for potential
'violations' while naming apps (or, really, anything else) to head this off
before it becomes a problem...

~~~
talmand
I think that if we've reached a point that a developer cannot use the generic
word candy in the title of their app, whether it relates to Candy Crush or
not, then we already have problems. It's bad enough we have to use apps with
misspelled words to avoid litigation or create new IP, but now people have to
spell candy as "kandi" to avoid lawsuits? It just seems to make everyone
involved appear to be completely stupid.

Seems on a weekly basis the price of entry to this industry continues to go
up.

~~~
interstitial
Misspellings technically don't count if they still sound like the original.
[http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/infringe.html](http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/infringe.html)

------
gonzo
Wait a minute.

This is a notice of publication. It's not a registration.

[http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4804:ziuhzn...](http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4804:ziuhzn.5.1)

Note the priority date of Feb 1, 2013, but the game was released a year
earlier.

Something is fishy.

------
codyb
I think things like this just pan out to ludicrous.

Although, really, is it because Candy Crush seems smaller to me than Apple
Computers?

Is it because it is so much harder to enter the hardware market than the app
store market?

It ends up being incredibly difficult defining the line at which you stop I
find when I think about it.

Anyways, I never liked the game much and haven't played it in ages so I
deleted it in mock "protest".

I guess I wouldn't mind so much if they trademarked it, then went after people
using things that looked like their candy, or games using the name with
similar concepts. But the candy casino game?

I assume Apple doesn't keep track of every single trademarking that goes on
with every app developer and King must be initiating the requests.

------
tharri
Acording to the USPS, the current status is:

"Approved by the examining attorney for publication but has not yet published
for opposition. Although rare, withdrawal of approval prior to publication may
occur after final review. The opposition period begins on the date of
publication."

A trademark is not registered until at least 30 days _after_ it is first
published for opposition. DannyBee is right on. These developers should be
thanking the idiot lawyer for sending a C&D, as now they can file opposition
claims with the US Trademark office and prevent it from being registered.

------
siebewarmoesker
Pretty much the same story as the trademark on "Insta" by Instagram.

~~~
judk
Which of course they stole from
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instamatic](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instamatic)

~~~
Zikes
Funny enough, iPhone was trademarked in Brazil way back in 2000. Last year a
judge basically yanked that trademark away and gave it to Apple because Apple
is "world renowned" and thus deserved it more. [1]

I guess trademark ownership is rather nebulous after all.

[http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/25/4770180/apple-wins-
iphone-...](http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/25/4770180/apple-wins-iphone-
trademark-case-in-brazil)

~~~
vacri
'ios' already existed as an operating system waaay before the iphone was a
glint in Jobs' eye. Cisco network equipment runs ios.

~~~
comex
Apple supposedly actually has a license deal with Cisco over that.

~~~
vacri
Thanks - you've been today's lesson for me:
[http://blogs.cisco.com/news/cisco_and_apple_agreement_on_ios...](http://blogs.cisco.com/news/cisco_and_apple_agreement_on_ios_trademark/)

------
SimHacker
Dammit, what's a young, recently divorced fashion pre-cog to do?

One minute you're riding high on top of the world, pushing your monopoly of
addictive multi player hallucinogenic Can-D on a global social network of Mars
colonists, who get hooked on your freemium layouts, then blow all their money
on in-app purchases of miniature virtual fashion accessories and appliances
for their avatars.

Then all of a sudden, some tri-stigmatic transhumanly evolved hipster bastard
comes along with the even more addictive alien hallucinogenic Chew-Z imported
from the Prox system, and not only hooks all of your users and dries up your
downloadable content business, but actually provides infinitely better one-on-
one real time online customer service.

I mean, what kind of a dick head move is that??!

[http://totaldickhead.blogspot.nl/2008/10/back-with-
vengeance...](http://totaldickhead.blogspot.nl/2008/10/back-with-vengeance-
and-some-cool.html)

------
blisterpeanuts
There are 252 apps in the Android Market with "Candy" in the name (including
the Candy Crush set of games, and a few dupes like free/ad and paid).

Likely there are hundreds of comparable apps in Apple's app store but I can't
quite fathom how to search from a desktop browser (???).

Sounds like they'll need to sue a lot of people to enforce that trademark.
What's next--"blaster"? "nuke"? "Kill"? "Monster"? Pretty soon, if this
ridiculous effort succeeds, all the common dictionary words will get locked up
in trademarks, just as domain names did 10-15 years earlier.

But somehow I doubt it, and probably it will give them more bad press and
headaches than it's worth. I already know that I won't be buying their apps
for my family's use.

------
kevinpet
Can someone with experience in trademarks comment on whether the PTO is
supposed to validate the subjective notion of whether the proposed trademark
uniquely refers to that company's products, or is registration just to add it
to the database so that people can do a trademark search?

~~~
unavoidable
The PTO is supposed to (and its employees are trained to) disallow trademark
claims that do not meet the criteria for obtaining a trademark (for example,
due to the term being generic, or because of descriptiveness). So a company
that sells candy would not be allowed by the PTO to register a trademark for
the word "candy".

Now, the situation gets a bit trickier for words and industries that don't
really relate, like "candy" and video games (or, as the example in other
comments, "apple" and electronics). In this case, the reality is that
trademark agents will file a claim for something relatively broad, and the PTO
will initially reject the claim for overbreadth (this is the default in
practice), whereupon the trademark agent will narrow the claimed goods and
services until the PTO accepts it.

In some cases, they do not ever accept such claims - but given enough time,
one supposes that you can find a narrow enough set of goods that you can
market exclusively with the word "candy".

Of course, the PTO is subject to review by courts. The problem for the PTO is
that if they reject something, that decision can be appealed. Parties with
deep pockets will always try to appeal if they think the mark is worth enough
(see Apple). So it's a waste of the PTO's time and effort to be very
aggressive in denying claims.

In effect, the process is just one of narrowing and back-and-forth
negotiating, rather than a "yes"/"no" decision.

In short, the PTO gets blamed a lot for accepting shitty claims (both patents
and trademarks), but they really don't have that much incentive to reject
claims aggressively, because they get money from applications, and rejections
are subject to review anyway.

------
agateau
While the trademark feels abusive, gamezebo really did not pick the best
example: how can one name his game "All Candy Casino Slots – Jewel Craze
Connect: Big Blast Mania Land" and then pretend he did not try to take
advantage of the name of famous games?

------
yeukhon
I can understand Apple being a trademark (the one bite apple logo and the
capital Apple, Inc) but come on trademark Candy for your game Candy Crush
Saga?

This is on HN today:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7089879](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7089879)

/joking: And the article mentions CSP. Maybe we should trademark CSP so we
don't get Content-Security-Policy confused with Communicating Sequential
Processes (or the other way around).

It's just ridiculous.

------
ijk
They're also going after The Banner Saga for the use of the term "Saga":

[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/ttabvue-91214235-OPP-1.pdf](http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/ttabvue-91214235-OPP-1.pdf)

[http://kotaku.com/candy-crush-saga-makers-go-after-the-
banne...](http://kotaku.com/candy-crush-saga-makers-go-after-the-banner-saga-
for-1506188958)

------
Oculus
Had to do a double take just to make sure I read the title correctly. Still
thinking: 'Surely you can't be serious..'

------
Fuxy
I think I'll start applying for trademark on all the dictionary words now.

It seems to be the next domain name rush.

On a more serious note WTF?

I seriously see app store collapsing if they let this kind of thing slide.

Either that or all the apps will have weird name so the don't infringe on
anybody.

I feel sorry for the developers that need to come up with a name for their
apps.

------
ebbv
This is hilarious coming from a developer that simply ripped off Bejeweled
with D Grade art and sound assets.

------
kartikkumar
Do these trademarks go international? Isn't King a UK-based company? If they
filed for the trademark in the US, do they have separate filings for each
country that they want to protect "candy"?

What if you are an app developer outside the jurisdiction of the trademark?
Can you just ignore?

------
vayarajesh
How candy-crush uses human behavior to make it an addictive game?

[http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1050994](http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1050994)

------
kalleboo
Reminds me of the old Maxis Sim* series. Could they enforce someone else
releasing a game called SimSomething? Or Apple using lowercase i's as
prefixes.

------
cclogg
A side note: the term "Tower Defense" is already trademarked in case anyone
cares lol. Can't use it on the app store :(

------
coldcode
Children all over the world will be sad. No more ##### for you.

------
dyscrete
This will cost them in the long run.

------
numanumakid01
Congrats to the team! No one deserves this success more.

~~~
jessaustin
Aaarrgh! Is this satire or cluelessness? I can't tell anymore...

~~~
pbhjpbhj
I think it's an automated submission. Like the "Your blog about $BLOG-TITLE is
fantastic Ill recomend it to al my frends".

~~~
interstitial
He forgot his template tags: Congrats to the YC! ${YEAR} alumni on {[new round
of funding|buy out|accepting bitcoin]}. No one deserves this success more.
Sorry your daughter died in ${death} ? "Car accident"

