
Citigroup trademarks “THANKYOU” and sues AT&T for thanking clients - walterbell
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/06/citigroup-trademarks-thankyou-and-sues-att-for-thanking-clients/
======
hugodahl
The next time I thank someone in all caps, I'll be sure to put two spaces
between the word "thank" and "you"... Just in case. Maybe I should trademark
it, to be safe and protect myself from being confused for a financial
institution or something equally derogatory.

------
Camillo
What's actually happening here is that Citigroup has been using the trademark
"Citi ThankYou" for a customer rewards program, and is objecting to AT&T's new
mark "AT&T thanks" for a customer rewards program.

The title implies that the complaint is over ordinary use of the expression
"thank you" to thank people, but that is not the case at all.

Ars Technica, which years ago used to be a great source for technical news,
continues its transformation into a professional shitposting outfit.

~~~
pawadu
Wait, so you think its fine to trademark "Citi Thank You" and all the sudden
own "xxx thanks"?

edit: also, what is with the Ars hate these days? I think they are still doing
a pretty good job, unlike say engadget, theverge and anandtech.

~~~
spacemanmatt
Doubtful. PP was addressing the nature and scope of the complaint, not
endorsing it.

------
King-Aaron
How the fuck can any judge in their right mind allow a case like this into
their courtroom? This is probably one of the worst examples of copyright
(edit: IP Laws) getting out of control I've seen in a long while.

~~~
ZenPsycho
Trademark. they are talking about trademarks here, not copyrights. The two are
so vastly different, for vastly different purposes, and vastly different
constraints placed on them, that it is beyond foolishness to confuse the two.
There's a bit of irony here as well, since preventing consumers from confusing
two things is the whole point of trademarks.

~~~
King-Aaron
> The two are so vastly different, for vastly different purposes, and vastly
> different constraints placed on them, that it is beyond foolishness to
> confuse the two.

It's actually not _vastly_ different, however there is a clear difference
indeed. I feel you're just out hunting for something to be pedantic about,
lol.

~~~
ZenPsycho
Trademark is a consumer protection law. Copyright is a creator protection law.

They are not anywhere close to the same sort of thing except if you look at
them kind of sideways. To casually interchange them makes no sense.

~~~
abestic9
Let's acknowledge the difference between Trademark and Copyright. Is it any
less senseless?

~~~
ZenPsycho
In truth, no, because even if one were to correctly identify this case as
being about Trademark law, and complained about how "out of hand" these laws
are getting, that would still be ignorant of the fact that trademark law
_requires_ companies to vigorously protect their trademarks or risk losing
them.

Furthermore, trademarking generic words and phrases (such as "Apple" or
"Orange" or "THANKYOU") is totally legitimate, since the additional
requirement for a trademark is that the category or industry is part of the
trademark and the protection only extends to that category. No, the flimsiest
part of this lawsuit is that AT&T cannot be reasonably said to be operating in
the banking industry- but in this case they specifically used the "THANK" word
in the context of its partnership with CITI GROUP, so in this specific case
AT&T _was_ operating in the banking industry, and using something confusingly
similar to CITI GROUP's trademark. and so of course, CITI GROUP is not in this
case evil or litigious, but actually legally required to challenge that usage.
To not pursue this would be neglect of the law.

Of course, the most annoying part about this is how easy it is to exploit the
public's ignorance of how trademark law works to generate clicks and outrage.

~~~
inetsee
I believe San Diego Magazine trademarked "San Diego" quite a few years ago.
IIRC the trademark included the specific font used by the magazine on its
cover. If they had tried to trademark the phrase without limiting it to a
magazine with that specific font, I would hope they would have failed to get
the registration. I haven't looked at the filing in this case (life is too
short for this kind of bullshit), but I would hope it's limited to "THANKYOU",
all caps, no space.

~~~
ZenPsycho
whether they are similar enough to cause confusion is for the court to decide.
in any case it's close enough for citi group to potentially lose the trademark
if they don't challenge

