• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NeoGAF comments cited by ExxonMobil in trademark lawsuit over FXX logo

Status
Not open for further replies.

PsychBat!

Banned
Zl4mlZI.png

Fucking amazing....
 
Bwahahaha

I can't wrap my brain around this

What other new things can we say looks like an old thing? Lets get more GAFers mentioned in court documents
 
haha a neogaf user saying "Damn it I was going to say that" is evidence in an official lawsuit

America for you

So have those neogaf members been notified that their statements are being used as testimonial?
 

MThanded

I Was There! Official L Receiver 2/12/2016
Not sure if we should be proud or embarrassed that Neogaf is being used as evidence to defend exxon.
 

xenist

Member
Hey judge! If you're reading this, Exxon should lose. Remember, FX shows Louie. They're clearly more deserving to win.
 

Mudkips

Banned
Contempt of court, now you going to jail.

Hope it was worth it.

I do not recognise the authority of a court that hangs the gold fringed flag. A flag with gilded edges is the flag of an admiralty court. An admiralty court signifies a naval court marshall, I cannot be court marshalled twice. That is all.

GAYlkWp.gif
 

McDougles

Member
Says a lot that a lawyer was able to find a similarity based off a 6 month old NeoGAF post rather than finding the illusive FXX channel and its logo on their cable box.
 

syllogism

Member
One of the elements for determining whether the trademark is confusingly similar is any evidence of actual confusion by consumers, so it's not surprising at all that an Internet post is being cited. That's also why I think that it's likely that the post was found via a Google search; searching for evidence is certainly a routine step.
 

BluWacky

Member
Says a lot that a lawyer was able to find a similarity based off a 6 month old NeoGAF post rather than finding the illusive FXX channel and its logo on their cable box.

It's not about that. The lawyers have to prove that there is a likelihood of the trademarks being confused. The anecdotal NeoGAF evidence proves that far more than just looking at a logo.

There will probably be elements of the lawsuit that also talk about the fonts, the angles etc.
 

Zoe

Member
It's not about that. The lawyers have to prove that there is a likelihood of the trademarks being confused. The anecdotal NeoGAF evidence proves that far more than just looking at a logo.

There will probably be elements of the lawsuit that also talk about the fonts, the angles etc.

Same thing happened with the Kevin Butler/Firestone case. GAF wasn't specifically called out, but it did mention "confusion" on gaming sites.
 
as someone who looks at logos for the patent office daily (well not this week- thanks congress) I can see Exxon losing this battle easily.
 

Mononoke

Banned
I just did a quick search to try to find a better explanation. I think it would fall under this:



If it's allowed to be overused, there could be risk of the trademark becoming generic and thus unprotected.

Thanks for the reply. This certainly clarified it a bit more for me.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
I want a lawsuit involving CBOAT comments to happen. Imagine them saying that username in court and having to read those posts.
 

hateradio

The Most Dangerous Yes Man
I'm still shocked that my user name is on some legal document.

I guess all those new logo threads should be taken seriously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom