
Artist trademarks 'Pi' symbol, enrages the web - adeaver
http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/yourcommunity/2014/06/artist-trademarks-pi-symbol-enrages-the-web.html?cmp=fbtl
======
rdtsc
How does this happen? Who are the people who decide what is a valid
patent/trademark and what isn't? We all here look at each other in disbelief
(figuratively). Yes someone granted the the trademark thinking this is valid
thing to do.

I guess, thinking about it. No matter how indignant I would get about this
topic, I really don't see myself dropping programming and applying to the
Patent Office.

It seems to me this is not completely unlike the case of primary education in
US. I have heard and seen horror stories about utter incompetence of math and
science teachers in some schools. I get angry and indignant about it. But, in
the morning, I will go back to programming. I will not be applying for a
teaching certificate or whatever the first step is to become a teacher.

Painting with broad strokes here, it seem, this is the work non-experts doing
experts' work. The tragedy is there are anti-incentives to attracting
passionate or driven individuals in such positions. Bureaucracy, low pay,
perceived cultural low status of the jobs, is probably the driving force
behinds these kind of things.

~~~
slapshot
This case is about a trademark, not a patent. Any word or symbol that
identifies a source of goods can be a trademark. Hence Apple getting a
trademark on using the word "Apple" to sell computers even though people have
been using the word "apple" to refer to fruit for hundreds of years. (The same
goes for "Amazon" despite the river, "Windows" despite the ventilation system,
and "Beats" despite the existence of rhythm). If one tried to sell computer
parts under the name "Apple" or any reasonable variant thereof, it wouldn't be
a defense to say "look, there's a fruit called the same thing."

The real problem here is that Zazzle caved in based on a weak letter about the
trademark -- not that the trademark office somehow failed. If Apple Inc sent a
letter to Zazzle asking to remove all references to the word "apple" in
Zazzle, the problem wouldn't be that Apple's trademark is invalid (it's
perfectly valid for selling computers), but rather that Apple would have
stretched its trademark too far (it only grants the right to control uses
related to selling computers). Same here. Somebody could quite reasonably sell
computer products under the name "Pi" (see Raspberry Pi for example), but that
wouldn't grant the right to remove all references to the number from Zazzle.

~~~
rdtsc
> Any word or symbol that identifies a source of goods can be a trademark

This is not exactly like Apple I think.

This is about printing texts on T-shirt. It is only a small step further from
printing texts on a white paper.

Moreover it is about printing a letter in the Greek alphabet that also happens
to be a common mathematical symbol.

I can see maybe if the trademark was about very specific font and color
combined. They anyone else could just pick a different font. It doesn't seem
to like that.

~~~
chrismcb
This is NOT about printing texts on a Tshirt. It is about a company trying to
brand itself as "pi." (why they would want to do that is beyond me) JUST like
Apple branded itself as "Apple" This company will make clothing apparel. This
does NOT stop anyone else from putting the symbol pi on a tshirt. You just
can't do it in a way that makes it look like you are the "pi." company.

------
chrismcb
It is a trademark, not a patent nor copyright. There was not copyright
violation, and not trademark violation. Zazzle jumped the gun. If they had
actually read the letter they could just have ignored it.

------
ivanhoe
Imagine if all math books in future will have to include a footnote saying:
"All greek letters' trademarks are property of their respective owners" :)

~~~
ljf
A is for Apple™...

------
ilyanep
IANAL but I'm pretty sure that a judge would never rule that there was
possibility of confusion between all of these products on Zazzle and Pi
Corporation. I think the real issue here is that Zazzle needs to exercise more
discretion on which cease and desist letters it follows.

~~~
sgdesign
Yes, this definitely seems like a mistake on Zazzle's part.

And it's possible the artist may have been acting in good faith, and only
wanted designs that actually copy his brand removed, not _all_ designs
featuring pi.

Edit: OK, it does seems like the artist is also abusing the system here,
judging by his other trademark: [http://news.artnet.com/art-world/artist-who-
trademarked-pi-s...](http://news.artnet.com/art-world/artist-who-trademarked-
pi-symbol-has-designs-on-ilt3quot-31754)

------
coherentpony
Are people allowed to trademark an arbitrary letter of an arbitrary alphabet?
How about arbitrary collections of letters that may or may not form a 'word'?

~~~
slapshot
Yes and yes. "IBM" doesn't form a word, but it's a perfectly valid trademark
and you would be sued into oblivion (quite fairly at that) for trying to sell
computer software or hardware as "IBM." Gatorade has a trademark on a capital
"G" in the field of sports drinks because consumers have come to recognize the
"G" line of products. "Google" is a mostly-made-up word (it was at least
unfamiliar before Google became popular) and it is a valid trademark. "Apple"
is a commonly known word and it is also a valid trademark. The symbol for
Prince [1] is an arbitrary symbol that could also be trademarked.

The key fact is that trademarks protect the right to use a word or symbol in
connection with selling goods or services in a certain field. Apple doesn't
get to ban all uses of the word "apple" but you couldn't go sell your own
products as "Apple Computing Stuff". Prince can't ban people drawing the
symbol linked above, but he could sue anybody who released a CD with that as
their cover artwork. Gatorade doesn't control all uses of the letter "G" but I
wouldn't try selling a sports drink with just a capital G on the bottle.

Zazzle done messed up, but not because letters or symbols alone couldn't be
trademark.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Prince_logo.svg](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Prince_logo.svg)

~~~
coherentpony
>Yes and yes.

That's all I needed to hear. Trademarking 'pi' is therefore nothing more than
exactly this.

There's therefore no need to rage out.

------
jessedhillon
I wish newegg would bait this guy with a pi-themed sale or event.

------
rebolek
What kind of artist is he? It looks to me he's a con artist.

------
plink
Did Mr. Ingrisano actually create and copyright a particular font used with
his trademarked symbol or does his trademark apply to any use of that symbol
followed by a period? Is the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office testing how thin
the ice upon which it can skate before the entire institution falls through?

~~~
Zren
Looks like your regular old Times New Roman font.

[http://graphemica.com/%CF%80/glyphs/times-new-roman-
regular](http://graphemica.com/%CF%80/glyphs/times-new-roman-regular)

[http://www.scribd.com/doc/227367808/Zazzle-Pi-Trademark-
Lett...](http://www.scribd.com/doc/227367808/Zazzle-Pi-Trademark-Letter)

------
tluyben2
Weak Zazzle and anyone else actually taking this seriously in the first place,
even if they reconsidered afterwards. The incentive to try to abuse the system
is too great in the US and met with success way too often... Companies and
individuals need to stand up against this kind of thing.

------
jbrooksuk
I <3 this guy's next attempt.

[http://www.trademarks411.com/marks/85481027-i-lt-3](http://www.trademarks411.com/marks/85481027-i-lt-3)

For the record, I don't.

------
dang
A dupe of
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7827524](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7827524).

------
spacemanmatt
π.

~~~
ingrisano
Money, please.

