digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Adobe Gets Sensitive About AIR Trademark

readwriteweb.com — Two months ago we reviewed a neat Adobe AIR app directory called FreshAirapps. FreshAIRapps looked to be the premier destination for debuting Adobe AIR applications. Two months later and the creator, James Whittaker, is under fire by the very company he's freely promoted.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Sunsneezer, on 07/07/2008, -4/+19Aren't they just sticking to the trademark protection they use for all their brands? How many domain names have "photoshop" in them? Anyway he should have asked....
    • spectre_25gt, on 07/07/2008, -1/+7Having "Photoshop" in a domain name is quite a bit different than having "air" in a domain name.
    • Markpdotcom, on 07/07/2008, -1/+8AIR is not a unique word though, like Photoshop is.

      Its like saying Adobe own air, and when ever you want to use it in a sentence you owe them money.

      Its stupid.

      If his website was Fresh-adobeair-apps, then they would have a case, its not so adobe can ***** right off.
  • knightrd, on 07/07/2008, -4/+8They are free to bully as they like, but it will only hurt them. Imagine if they did the same thing for the PDF format.
    • banmaster, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4Um, they DID do it with the PDF format.
    • noahhoward, on 07/07/2008, -6/+7It is not bullying it is required trademark protection.
  • sdm011, on 07/07/2008, -10/+4Crap.. I breath that stuff.

    But in all seriousness. Stop acting like AIR is all that great. Its WebKit, get over yourself adobe, you didn't even write the app.
    • geoken, on 07/07/2008, -0/+7I think you're unclear about what AIR is. Webkit is merely one portion of the app. If you write an AIR app which doesn't need to internally render any HTML content it won't even use webkit at all.

      AIR is basically a wrapper for SWF's (similar to other projectors that existed before) which allows an SWF to run as a desktop application and gives it a few extra api's for stuff like local I/O. At it's core, it's simply a modified version of the flash player.
  • rumford, on 07/07/2008, -3/+22seriously. what is adobe thinking? they have no control. and yet they want to try and squash an evangelist that did something for the developer community and for users. this site raises awareness of AIR apps. Hell they should be paying his ass!
  • Sanduu, on 07/07/2008, -4/+17What are they thinking ? Idiots
  • geoken, on 07/07/2008, -3/+4This makes no sense. What's the worst that can happen if they let this guy keep the name? He one day starts listing malware and people are dumb enough to think his site is affiliated with adobe and begin blaming adobe for distributing malware? Seems like their fix (which makes them look like total assholes) is almost as bad as the highly implausible worst case scenario.
  • ruddy, on 07/07/2008, -1/+13Adobe AIR app directory called FreshAirapps, or FAPPS for short.
    • ninetimes, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2My first thought when I saw the name was "Cool! Fresh AI Raps!" Couldn't wait to hear what those robots were rapping about.
  • ryanstewart, on 07/07/2008, -10/+34I just wanted to chime in that we're talking with James (the site owner) about finding a good solution. We have to legally defend our trademark or else we can lose it. Everyone I talk to at Adobe loves the site and I think it's a great resource for AIR applications. Hopefully we can work with James to come to a resolution that works for both he and Adobe.

    =Ryan
    rstewart@adobe.com
    • Otto, on 07/07/2008, -8/+21>>"We have to legally defend our trademark or else we can lose it."

      No, you don't. That's complete ***** no matter who says it, brother. You can give him explicit permission to use your trademark. Then you're in no legal danger of losing a damn thing.

      When you're being an *****, we will not hesitate to call you an *****. Blaming the lawyers for it doesn't make it any better.
    • ryanstewart, on 07/07/2008, -6/+12We did look into giving him permission to use the trademark but for whatever reason that wasn't going to work. I don't know the legal specifics of why not, but we've been working closely with him for a while to find a compromise. And we still are.

      =Ryan
      rstewart@adobe.com
      • Sidzilla, on 07/07/2008, -2/+6Does Nike know you ripped them off?
      • Otto, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1>>"I don't know the legal specifics of why not.."

        That's because there aren't any, and that's because you're either a) lying or b) have been lied to.

        Simple, really.
    • Hermmunster, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4Ryan, you can't trademark the word Air. You do know that it has been used in other products first? Also, you do realize this is a common word? Even within the context of the program you can't trademark it because it is common. It's like me trademarking the word "tire" and prohibiting any automotive business from using it unless I give them rights.

      He needs to challenge your trademark or someone does so that it can be thrown out. Adobe@Air is fine, Those combined give you the trademark but to use the term Air to promote a site for Adobe@Air is not illegal. Think again if you don't believe your trademark will be challenged due to this or that he won't find favorable press which makes Adobe look petty, or that he won't find some organization like the EFF to push your trademark out of existence.

      Why don't you become a non-evil entity and fix up your mistake and just let him go on with his life?
      • BossKey, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4Explaining all this is futile and a waste of your energy. It really doesn't matter what your logic is or what Adobe's logic is.

        The only logic that applies in this situation is the legal framework advanced by the lawyers employed by the company in question. That's why Adobe can't just do what seems reasonable to you, me, or them. Like any company, they can't do what their lawyers tell them will expose them to legal problems. It would happen to your company too.

        So stop explaining to Adobe what Adobe should do, and start explaining it to their lawyers, because those are the ones holding the strings here. This is not an Adobe-specific problem because it will apply to any other company, like the next time this comes up on Digg, like when Apple has to tell some iPod website or accessory maker not to use iPod in their name.
    • aboyd, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Explain how planetphotoshop.com has gone untouched by Adobe, Ryan. You singled out one guy to screw over, while ignoring tons of other more blatant "violations."
    • anubis2night, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2You adobe guys must have be eating a lot of tard berries or something, anyone even remotely into trademarks knows that defending your name is only in regards to a associated field. I.E. if you trademark your name Enron and register it for the fields of use in Software, and Business Finance, then and have a sideways E that's your trademark for your company that's all you have the right to protect. If someone uses the name Enron for clothing and it's not even remotely the same design or field your going to have a hard time pressing the issue to court let alone protecting it. As was mentioned before your product name being called Air is so mediocre as to be hard pressed to make him turn away from using the term. Now if he was using your products registered trademark that might be different but only if he was using it in the vernacular of a common good (think calling all suv's jeeps) but to simply use it to promote your products should pose no threat to your trademark, granted your lawyers may say different but again they are getting paid to advise you against allowing him to use the name so it doesn't make a lot of sense. Also please consult a trademark attorney. As most attorneys I've met barely have a grasp on the aspect of the law that they specialize in. With the ever changing direction of the courts you never know, but this should be an open and shut case...
  • gluecode, on 07/07/2008, -3/+7How can a generic name like 'AIR' be trademarked? Do I have to seek Adobe's permission to breathe?
    • zeptobyte, on 07/07/2008, -2/+4Same way other generic words like "Adobe", "Flash", and "Acrobat" are trademarked. They identify a particular product or company.
    • gluecode, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3Thanks. I think I agree. I heard that Windows is not a Microsoft trademark, but Microsoft Windows is. This is because of the generic nature of the word Windows. Is there any truth to this story?
      • Markpdotcom, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3100% true.
      • gluecode, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Thanks for the confirmation.
      • anubis2night, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Actually the trademark for the name would only apply to the specific logo, the typeface and any design used in conjunction with the word, it would also only be trademarked for those areas it was licensed for. So software would be one but there may be more items also last time I checked it's $75 for each additional area you want to trademark the name under.
    • geoken, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4You also have to be using the name to profit off the trademark owners marketing. That probably doesn't make a lot of sense so I'll give an example.

      Nissan.com does not belong to the car company. It belongs to some guy called Uzi Nissan and functions as an online storefront for his computer shop. Nissan (the car company) tried to sue him but didn't get anywhere because the guy was just using his last name so it couldn't be proven that he was trying to profit off their brand. However, knowing that a lot of potential car shoppers were mistakenly landing on his site he decided to throw up some car related ads (ie. paid links to major car shopping websites like Edmunds). When he did this he was ordered by the courts to take down the ads because in that case he was using the car companies brand recognition, in conjunction with brand confusion, to turn a profit.

      I hope that example accurately illustrates the subtle differences.
      • anubis2night, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Glad to see someone using the logic of trademark and giving a great illustration to back it up.
  • adidos, on 07/07/2008, -1/+17Silly Adobe, I think his website is actually FresHairApps...it showcases neat new hair styles.
    • WNW3, on 07/07/2008, -0/+5I thought it was Fresh AI Rapps about a hip-hop artificial intelligence
  • zeptobyte, on 07/07/2008, -8/+3If they don't protect their trademark they will lose their rights to it. They don't really have much choice other than to go after people who do this, whether they actually care or not. They're protecting themselves, not just bullying him.
  • reaper527, on 07/07/2008, -3/+3its probably a misunderstanding. there was a story a year ago or two ago with gears of war, where the lawyer team acted on a case like this before anyone in the company even knew about it. once the higher ups got word of what happened, they fixed everything.

    that aside,
    "you'll see a note from James Whittaker noting that Whittaker's usage of the word "AIR" in his domain name poses a problem with Adobe."

    will they go after someone with fAIR in their domain?
  • TheGreatBelow, on 07/07/2008, -5/+10Macromedia, we miss you.
    • Markpdotcom, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4I don't know why you're getting dugg down?

      I'm amazed Adobe was allowed to buy Macromedia. It MUST contravene some monopoly legislation!
  • Frazzlet, on 07/07/2008, -1/+9I'm no copyright guru, but surely adobe doesn't own the rights to the word "AIR". "Adobe AIR" yes, but not just "AIR".
    • ElectricKetchup, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1It's not a copyright issue; it's a trademark issue.
  • bat-21, on 07/07/2008, -2/+6Art is resistance.
  • sporg, on 07/07/2008, -6/+5I always liked adobe software back in the 90's but these days it is turning into bloatware. This last version I downloaded takes forever to install too.

    http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3907426/Adobe_CS3_Mast ...

    I can vouch for the fact that this does work :).
    • ortucis, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1Idiots like you should be left naked and bend over with a pirated Phil Collins cd shoved up their ass in front of some RIAA HQ.
      • sporg, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Judging from your profile you are angry with me because I criticized that silly game. Blocked.
  • mikelist, on 07/07/2008, -2/+2arrogance or stupidity, or what difference might it make? the word "air" is commonly used and to open use of a common word to proprietary restrictions is pretty stupid. unless there's a 'distinctive' logo or graphic that goes with it, it probably doesn't have much of a real complaint, but if it goes to a jury, ...
  • vcudigg, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4flashkit.com ? planetphotoshop.com ? What else will they go after now? I have a feeling this is the legal team at work. In these kind of situations I try very hard not to get mad at the Adobe designers/engineers. I wonder how many working at Adobe use these sites for their projects!
  • SitPoMk, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2This sort of reminds me of that Creative fiasco about the drivers
    A company squashing someone they should really be paying
  • goodsela, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2Adobe want to own your soul:

    http://moistness.blogspot.com/2008/03/adobe-owns-y ...
    • Markpdotcom, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Although I'd never normally digg what is essentially blog spam, I did not know that any photo you upload to Photoshop Express becomes the property of Adobe! So much for small print eh?
      • goodsela, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Not blogspam, just adding to the conversation.
      • BossKey, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1It's the same language used on Flickr, etc. and probably lots of other sites you use. Go ahead and check.

        Was that post from before or after they revised the "property" language?
  • FredFredrickson, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3Air will probably not become anything worthwhile anyway.
  • Karai, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Wouldn't it be really nice if all websites that promoted a product had the product name in the domain name, so you know right away that you are browsing a site dedicated to that product? "refreshing-apps.com" is way to disambiguate and it could be apps for ANYTHING.

    there are tons of sites out there named after the "product" they use, such as phptutorials.com, cplusplus.com, and many others that I can't think of off the top of my head. All in all I think it will hurt Adobe's rep for something so ridiculous, free advertising and getting your product out there in the open is somethign many companies woudl love to have, not stomp on...
  • iamnotrich, on 07/07/2008, -0/+7*****.com is already taken..
  • pcpimpster, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1I guess when you no longer have much weight using pdf...you go for general words like flash and air.
    They're lucky they own flash and the photo shop.
  • Sephr, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Tons of AIR apps' names include the word AIR, so they should all be taken down according to Adobe.
  • Hermmunster, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3Adobe cannot trademark the word AIR even all capitals. Can they trademark it within the context of Adobe and the products that which it represents? I doubt they can. The reason is that AIR is a common word, sort of like Windows or Word. You can't trademark that. Windows is too common and so is the word Word. The way Microsoft wins in these cases is to beat down on the alleged transgressor with lots of money and threaten their very being. When Lindows was being used Microsoft came down on them. What saved them from having the term "Windows" from being challenged is that they agreed to pay Lindows (which became Linspire, and ultimately was sold to Xandros) was a big pay off. I wish Lindows hadn't let us down and they had challenged Microsoft to the end. I wish they'd have beat the the Windows right out of them.

    Unfortunately this guy is probably too small to beat the ***** out of Adobe's billions. You didn't think air would ever cost you money. Well, this is one of those attempts to litigate you into pay for it.
    • geoken, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3You can trademark it in the context that it represents. If you use a trademarked name, even one comprised of common words, you can be legal stopped if it can be proven that your choice causes brand confusion. For example, Uzi Nissan was allowed to use the domain Nissan.com for his computer store but as soon as he put up ads for car sites the courts ordered a C&D.
  • battlemyphoto, on 07/07/2008, -4/+0Man digg is full of a bunch of babies.. why don't you read the ***** trademark before assuming they are attempting completely own the word air.
  • my10cent, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Well I guess we just stop using air then
  • ironmonk69, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0I too am amazed at this latest report of bullying practice. I do wonder if the reason they changed the name from Apollo to AIR was due to their not wanting to impinge upon the Greco-Roman gods domain. Note: "Apollo was also seen as a god who could bring ill-health and deadly plague as well as one who had the ability to cure." (quote taken from wikipedia.org)
  • ss6sam6, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0It should get sensitive, bloody AIR means dick in Arabic, how could we talk about this stupidily named tech?
  • historyrepeats, on 07/09/2008, -1/+0It's not the first time since Adobe took over Flash:

    http://www.actionscript.com/Article/tabid/54/Artic ...

    http://blog.deconcept.com/2006/04/21/flashobject-t ...

    http://www.jeffryhouser.com/index.cfm/2006/4/21/Ad ...

    The main issue is that it seems arbitrary who/what they go after...
  • roarus, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Impossible! Jordan staked claim to air long time ago
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.