What is Digg?78 Comments
- neotek, on 10/12/2007, -9/+42To be fair, Walmart's not doing anything evil here. They're just trying to stop this guy with a counter-claim.
- Rickler, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22I believe Forrest Gump invented the smiley face.
- bebop717, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22in 1000 years every image possible will be copy-written. Arts and crafts day for kids will be ripe with absurd accusations and lawyers defending their artistic right.
- Takteek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+181st Grade Teacher: Alright class, now draw a circle containing a person's face with a cheerful countenance. Then shade it yellow.
Student: Whats count-a-nunce?
1st Grade Teacher (whispering): a smiley face
*Lawyers run in and drag teacher out of classroom* - Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18"spokesman John Smiley"??
This is a joke, right? - addakorn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15I have already trademarked the straight line. If you would like to license my trademark for use in your so called triangle feel free to contact me.
Additionally @ Profiler (below) I have the three primary colors as well as the two shades trademarked as well. Anyone wishing to use these colors or any mixture of these colors should contact me. - ajb2015, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15It's "John Simley", not "Smiley". The submitter got it wrong.
- RCourtney, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15or "slimey"
- Bluezdood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11And in other news, WalMart to begin using new tagline... "Your source for cheap plastic crap, always."
- theotheragentm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12He lost the rights to it though. __it happens.
- RCourtney, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Quick! Everyone :) :) :) :) before you can get sued for nothing more than a :)
- VijchtiDoodah, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17I came in here expecting people to be all pissed off and then I'd have to explain what Wal-Mart is really doing, but you already did that. Congratulations to you.
- TheReport, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Yeah this is pretty retarded, Its just as retarded as those celebrities who trademark their cutsey little phrases so Americans can hate them even more like "Thats Hot" Uh oh Im gonna get sued now, Its ok I can put up a fight "Lets Get Ready To Rumble" oh *****, Im really screwed now. Ok I know that was lame "Your Fired" aww crap...
- BitCrusher, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Anyone else notice that if you flip two letters in the spokesman's name you'd get "smiley"?
- Trjn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I think Sony already has the trademark on triangles.
Also circles, squares and the letter X. - Flankk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"in 1000 years every image possible will be copy-written."
We're already there, where have you been? Even beyond copyright, there are patents out there so broad, you could be sued for just about anything. - tonicboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6That's a typo in the Digg article. His name is Simley.
- CyberGlitch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7What's next, trademarking a triangle?
- fartingbob, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7They started using it in 1996. Even a corrupt patent office worker couldnt justify giving walmart that patent...
- Ikioi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Article Correction:
"by rubbing his wet and dirty face on a white T-shirt."
It was a yellow t-shirt, and it was brown mud, not dirt. This gave the smiley face it's yellow background, though reversed from what we normally see. However, it is obvious that what was implied was that it was 2 eyes, a smiling mouth, and the color yellow.
Next up, Microsoft trademarks "Sh*t Happens" for its new Vista line. - remmelt, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Excuse me, but that is just utter *****. The smiley is in the public domain. If there is some crazy French guy who wants to register it, he shouldn't be able to. That does NOT mean that suddenly Wall Mart has the right to register the smiley. How is that even logical? How are they even a party in this claim? Either the French guy invented it and has a right to the mark or he hasn't and doesn't get the right. Wall Mart doesn't enter into the picture. There is no need for any counter claiming. Wall Mart doesn't have any claim on the smiley apart from using it. At least the French guy claims to have invented it.
What, they have "tremendous investments" in the smiley face? Are you joking? Next up: Pamela Anderson seeks rights to female breasts claiming "tremendous investments". Give me a break, people.
By saying WM isn't evil in this case, you are falling for their spin. Stop doing that. - dj_sea2005, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"and was the unofficial symbol of the late 1980s acid house dance music movement."
THAT explains the smiley faces on those pills i found.
now if only i could remember what happened after i saw the smiley face. - Profiler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Cadbury has trademarked the colour purple!
- MonkeyPhil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This is just silly. But another hopeful step towards the whole patent system collapsing completely.
- quasarkitten, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Scott E. Fahlman is the inventor of the :-)
So you just infringed on his intellectual property rights, I suspect that cost him a least $3.00, in lost revenue.
--
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~sef/sefSmiley.htm - keesj, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6it's a typo, the article uses "John Simley"
- bonked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Speaking of copyright and trademark infringement.... hmmm....... you are a witty one aren't you.
http://carryabigsticker.com/mall_wart.htm
http://www.northernsun.com/cgi-bin/ns/5407.html
http://www.stickergiant.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=b5407&Category_Code=bprog - computerdude33, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Nintendo has the trademark on X, and Sesame Street has the trademark on the number five.
- pgm_01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Timothy Leary created the smiley.
- foobario, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"in 1000 years"?
In the next 20 we're going to see people getting sued for having children... and thereby violating patented genetic sequences.
I don't think we're going to make it another 1000 years... we'll have achieved total ideological gridlock long before then. - liquidizer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Someone owns the copyright on Happy Birthday because they wrote the words and music (or bought the rights from the person who did). The argument here is about whether drawing a face with two lines and two dots and colouring it yellow justifies legal protection. At its simplest, a smiley face is like a letter of the alphabet. Giving one company exclusive rights over it significantly narrows everybody else's ability to express themselves creatively and clearly.
- liquidizer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes, but only in the context of chocolate wrappers.
- everfalling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2what the hell, why not. someone already owns the trademark on the happy birthday song.
- ctitze2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I believe they can trademark their version of the smiley (the one which is slightly tilted with the olive eyes and the cheek marks ). I don't think they can trademark all smileys since the smiley (circle with 2 dots and line) is representing an idea of an abstract face, and idea's can't be trademarked. Wallmart only can trademark their execution of the smiley. Ideas only can be patented. But then again I'm not a law student.
If someone who's knowledgeable with IP law, please reply 'cause I'm curious whether I'm right or just talking BS. - bonked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2bojoes...
They shouldn't be able to profit off of the Donald's face, but the phrase "You're Fired" was made popular by many others long before Donald used it. Heck, I seem to remember a famous clip from 1998 being played daily on my favorite radio show's opener - Vincent McMahon of the WWE saying "YOU'RE FIRED!!!" on a highly rated weekly television show (at the time, it was the number one rated cable television show in the nation) - and he used it so often it was his catch-phrase, and they sold lots of T-shirts with that exact phrasing on it - how should the Donald be able to just show up about 7 years later and pretend he invented using the phrase "You're fired" on a national television show with high ratings and say no one can come in 7 years later and do the same thing.
Uniqueness needs to be taken in to account for any trademark or copyright claim. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Walmart is not CLAIMING to have invented it. They are protecting themselves from someone who is making that claim without any real proof.
- bonked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2TRADEMARK != COPYRIGHT
COPYRIGHT != PATENT
PATENT != TRADEMARK
THESE ARE THREE FSKING DIFFERENT THINGS...
"One should not hold strong opinions on that which one does not understand." Educate yourselves.
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/whatis.htm - kirakun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I once thought about trademarking the letter 'e.' I'm not greedy, just the letter 'e' is enough.
On the other hand, I suppose Microsoft would have first dip on that first. lol. - mr.hostility, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Cool, I'm trademarking the Ace of spades! I can't wait to sue every major casino in the world, and then Lemmy!
- mousky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Fartingbob: It's a trademark not a patent. Seesh, no wonder the intellectual property field is in a big mess.
- Aniphx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Honestly, I don't know why everyone is making such a huge fuss over the smiley. That just goes against it's spirit, right?
- johnnyrocket, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wal-Mart is evil, I tell ya, EEEEVILLLLL!!! Next, will they be trademarking the smile itself? Then...you can only be happy in a Wal-Mart store itself.
- LocalH, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Reported as inaccurate - Walmart may be trying to trademark it, but only because of some ***** frog (this particular guy, not French people in general).
/. had the same misleading headline. - ccanni1028, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Comment dugg just for the Microsoft line.
- dbug, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm trademarking the frowney face :(
- therernospoons, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Trademarking the smiley is just plain retarded. No one should own rights to this period.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I'm siding with the frog, as I believe him more than I would some greedy corporate cocksmocking retard, as they could never invent anything that has to do with any expression other than wringing of the hands or pulling of the pud.
- -=Ross=-, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You beat me to it.
@neotek: I agree. The guy who claims he created the smiley, his smiley was different anyways. But soon the smiley may not even be a public domain. - theone3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@remmelt
I'm betting they just plan to drag the case out until this idiot runs out of money, then not enforce the trademark. Or, at least, that seems to be what they're hinting towards. - hoowahman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's just a damn smiley face how could anyone trademark that? I want to puke.
-
Show 51 - 77 of 77 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is