Dang straight, can't knock a brother for trying
See all the notches cut at the fore end?
You don't even want to know how those got there.
When you are hanging out with Bill Gates, Steve Jobs wife, and Bruce Springsteen, all watching your daughters, does it get awkward when you talk business?
Yeah, I don't think it had anything to do with the SH site. They could literally have named it "Sniper's Hide". There's no trademark check to name a boat or anything -- you can call it whatever you want.
Trademark's are limited in scope to prevent people from damaging, profiting from, or diluting your brand. So their scope is limited essentially to something that could confuse a consumer into thinking X was related to your trademark.
The carving was the only part that might make sense. I see it has the open bolt firing mod for quick extraction.
Shit I live twenty miles from Naples now and I am on the water a few days of the week. Have never seen that boat but I can ask a few guide buddies if they know who runs it if Frank really cares ?
Naming it Sniper Hide with a circle with two crossed rifles. No, nothing to do with Snipers Hide.
Naming it Sniper Hide with a circle with two crossed rifles. No, nothing to do with Snipers Hide.
/sigh
It's entirely possible, sure. But, it's also entirely possible not. Think about how small your view on the world has to be to assume that something is associated with what you know and not something someone came up with on their own. You do realize there is nothing stopping this person from literally naming the boat "Sniper's Hide", right? You think they left that apostrophe s off just for shits, like people wouldn't draw the association as they copied something?
Or, just OR, maybe they didn't copy the site. MAYBE sniper and hide and two extremely commonly used words, happen to match the initials of the company that manufactured the boat, and the owner likes guns so he did a play on words. Maaaaaaaybe.
Maybe, just maybe, there's shit that lives outside your view of the world.
You notice how people call this place The Hide? Literally it's the title on the front page. Did you also know there is actually a site called THE HIDE!
If you go dig up a 50 year old military training booklet you'll probably find a definition for "hide" in it, literally in reference to a sniper hide. If you go look up the literal definition of sniper in a dictionary... you'll see the word hide or hidden in nearly every dictionary's example.
But, I'm sure you are right. After all, you've been to this website -- so it's the only way someone could ever possibly associate the word hide with sniper or think to put two fucking rifles in a circle -- because that has never been done, either.
What if it’s a Charter boat, wouldn’t he be profiting?
Yes, if the boat is operating a business under that name then you could have a potential conflict.
However, trademarks are limited in scope. For example, I could trademark the word asshole. But a trademark requires more specificity than this. So I'd have to trademark asshole as it relates to a commentator on internet forums.
So then I could be the only asshole to comment on forums.
But, if someone wanted to open a gynecologists' clinic and call it asshole -- they'd be good to go as their business clearly has nothing to do with my business.
If things didn't work this way there'd be no way for businesses to exist. Everyone would trademark a word and then you'd have a bunch of nameless, faceless businesses. Trademarks are often even limited in physical area in some ways. If you trademark asshole's diner -- then someone 900 miles away makes an asshole's diner that looks completely different -- you're going to have a hard case to fight that.
All of this is subjective. If you've got the money to take it to court, you can give damn near anything a shot. There's always a risk of losing your mark entirely when you go into court, though. Particularly if someone can show it's a common phrase or term that existed before the trademark was applied for.
For example; I could probably get some uncaring individual to approve a trademark application for "fried chicken." I could then go and sue KFC for infringing on my trademark. The judge would probably just cancel the trademark and probably have me writing a large check to KFC to cover any costs they incurred during the litigation.
Trademark litigation is a strange creature. There's really not a better way to phrase that, that I can think of. I would never look at a trademark case and make a prediction, no matter how obvious the case appeared. From what I've seen -- going into trademark litigation, you're almost as likely to have a the court cancel your own trademark as you are to come out with a victory (unless you can show actual malice).
I don't know what Frank's trademark is, or if he has registered any, but it would seem unlikely a boat named Sniper Hide would qualify as an infringement of that mark unless he was using the boat to train people to shoot from a boat or something where a person could be reasonably confused that the two businesses were related.
For example, I could go create a website and call it Google. I couldn't go create a search engine and name it Google, though. I'd also have to be careful not to use colors in the name that could in any way be construed as confusing the consumer. I used Google as an example because the word didn't exist until Google created it. (As best I know, that is true) My guess, and I'm not searching this because it's not that important, but I'm guessing they came up with it from googleplex. Nonetheless, the point is you can use a word that they literally created from thin air, kind of, as long as a normal consumer wouldn't confuse the brands. Google has also become nomenclature -- synonymous with searching the internet regardless of what methodology is being utilized.
Sniper is a common word, hide is a common word, the two are commonly used together and found together in dictionaries and published text going back decades, likely centuries. So if Google, a word that didn't even exist until Google coined it, could be used in ways that wouldn't infringe on Google's trademark -- well, I'm not going to say Frank wouldn't be able to win against some rando in a boat, but it's certainly not where I'd be putting my money if I were him. I honestly wouldn't be surprised at all if the guy has no idea this website even exists.
Think about it like this. If someone woke up from a coma that had been under for 30 years.. and you asked them what a Google was -- they'd tell you it was a number. Because a googol is an actual thing, a number. My parents were weird, my Father a physicist and my Mother a science teacher -- so googol was a commonly used term growing up that I have so eloquently replaced with the term fuckton today.
Anyway, the point I'm making is that you and I see Sniper's Hide and immediately think of this website because we've been here. If you showed the phrase to someone who's never been to this website they would just think of it as a literal thing, an adjective... words describing a spot in a tree, top of a tower, mountain ridge, whatever...
Y’all won’t be complaining when the babes go out on the boat, and the itty bitty bikini photos get put up on the MPT!
Judge Issues Restraining Order Against Lil Nas X's 'Satan Shoes'
A judge sided with Nike Thursday morning in the shoe giant’s latest legal battle against Lil Nas X and an art collective’s "Satan shoes."
www.rollingstone.com ^^^ this is a great example, Nike is claiming brand dilution and consumer confusion and won a TRO.
WP? (wet pontoons?) great name for a boat, kind of a double entendre on wet poon.....from the Zappa, tampoon......
I have exceptions and details spelled out because they are common words, it's kinda specific
my trademark is actually more internet based, than in Real life like that ... advertising SH on the internet violates it, but not necessarily like above, maybe a lawyer has a fancy way to enforce it, but that is still a hope as well as an expense not worth worrying about
But they spell all this out when applying and approving the trademark that is why you hire lawyers to do it
If I was going to rip off the logo, I would at least have the decency to put it on a proper craft.
That boat looks like a Somali pirate reject.
That boat looks like a Somali pirate reject.
To much meat on the bones
Judge Issues Restraining Order Against Lil Nas X's 'Satan Shoes'
A judge sided with Nike Thursday morning in the shoe giant’s latest legal battle against Lil Nas X and an art collective’s "Satan shoes."
^^^ this is a great example, Nike is claiming brand dilution and consumer confusion and won a TRO.
I mean, not sure if you're trying to argue that you disagree with my statement that trademark disputes are largely unpredictable or you're just showing a recent high profile decision? Technically, as you stated, all they got was a temporary order -- so they haven't won yet.
As I said previously, I wouldn't personally make a prediction either way, even in an example as egregious as this. I hope they win, from what little I know of the case they should win, but as I said -- these things are... they're just some kind of special, it seems.
That's all just my opinion, though, you're obviously welcome to differ.
I agree 100% with you, the "T" in TRO is another great illustration of how correct your analysis truly is, btw; has the TRO been reversed yet?
"all the world's a stage'
"first, let's kill all the lawyers'
Q- what do you call the dumbest attorney in the room?
A- "Your Honor"
Similar threads
