Candy Crush Saga worth $8 Billion

03-30-2014, 02:11 PM
#11
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 8,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teh_Ninja View Post
So you believe it's fine that King tried to trademark the word 'candy'?

That's not the question. You haven't understood what Eli said.

Hi, you seemed to be lost on the Internets.
This is TouchArcade, where 2$ for a game is too much, 5$ is an outrage, and 10$ or more is putting sugar in their car tanks whilst killing puppies.
03-30-2014, 06:54 PM
#12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teh_Ninja View Post
So you believe it's fine that King tried to trademark the word 'candy'?
The problem isn't with King, the problem is the 💩💩💩💩ed trademark laws that force you to do things like this. Every single person posting in this thread would do the same thing to protect their interests if something they made was suddenly worth $8b.

03-30-2014, 09:47 PM
#13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eli View Post
Again, you don't have an $8b company without protecting your interests to the fullest extent of the law. If you had your own $8b publicly traded company and decided to ignore your trademarks you'd quickly find yourself out of a job.
I get your point. I went to Florida State and Villanova for law..... I still think they are scumbags.

I never practiced law, though. I decided to work for FOX TV as an engineer. I am pretty well educated.
03-31-2014, 03:02 AM
#14
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: England
Posts: 9,832
I'm no fan of King BUT if they didnt protect their trademarks/IP like this then i'm sure you would see 100000's more Candy Crush clones all over the app store. When their games worth so much i can see why they want to protect their IP
04-06-2014, 10:42 AM
#15
So, the "saga" continues.... oops, lawsuit?

It turns out that one of my favorite all time companies is attempting to do the same this, and it makes me sad and angry.

Google wants to trademark the word "Glass".

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/52...mark-glass.htm

And as it states in the article, Facebook tried to trademark the word "Book".

Granted, they may be looking for trademarks in regards to the way certain words can be used, but nonetheless, IMO, you just can't trademark words that are part of everyday language and have been for hundreds of years.

But obviously, higher powers than me, disagree with my thinking. Facebook has a trademark on the word "wall", as it regards to posting on an internet site. Personally, I don't think it would hold up in court, but I wouldn't want to pay the money to defend against it, so I would lose.

My point is, this needs to be nipped in the bud.... let it keep going and everybody will be getting sued for trademark violations over ubiquitous words that have been used for centuries.

BTW, one of the goofiest trademarks, IMO..... Pat Riley, former NBA coach, owns the trademark to the "word" "Threepeat"........ when clearly, he didn't invent that word. I don't know who did, but that is who it should belong to, not Pat Riley.
04-07-2014, 01:45 AM
#16
There's been a couple of cases here where International companies have trademarked Maori language words and taken action to stop NZ organisations/people using them. One was a singers surname and the other was local educational software.

Idiotic to say the least.
04-07-2014, 02:44 AM
#17
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: England
Posts: 9,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Deuce View Post
It turns out that one of my favorite all time companies is attempting to do the same this, and it makes me sad and angry.

Google wants to trademark the word "Glass".
All large tech companies are the same, i remember all the crap about Microsoft or Micro$oft as the geeks called them, i didnt mind Microsoft at all, thanks to Windows i've had lots of work over the years and Bill Gates gives a TON to charity. Look at Apple and the 'alleged' slave labour in the far east etc.

But all the other companies are the same, Google in this example, look at Mozilla whos former MD said those homophobic comments (and has since resigned). They're all as bad as each other.