Bankrupt Mt Gox Wants To Sell Bitcoin Trademark For $1 Million

[Karloff]

Bankrupt Mt Gox Wants To Sell Bitcoin Trademark For $1 Million

So just how enforceable would that trademark be?

Embattled Mt Gox holds some interesting trademarks - including the word Bitcoin - and its parent company is seeking to sell them off, according to anonymous sources within the parent. The asking price is ¥100 million, or about $1 million, and the trademarks are currently due to expire in 2021 in Europe, 2022 in Japan. If it proceeds, the sale will also include the bitcoins.com domain name.

The anonymous source claims that the company has "no use for them [the trademarks]," hence the sale. Tibanne, Mt Gox's parent company, has one shareholder: Tibanne has no legal obligation to repay [http://www.scribd.com/doc/209535200/Business-Plan-MtGox-2014-2017#download] Mt Gox's 127,000 creditors.

Potential buyers beware: it's possible the Bitcoin trademark is unenforceable. According to the Wall Street Journal, legal experts suggest that, since the word Bitcoin was coined not by Mt Gox but by a person or entity calling itself Satoshi Nakamoto who used it in a 2008 research paper, and as the word has since become a common noun, there's no chance of claiming profit from the trademark.

In any event, when Mt Gox registered the trademarks back in 2011, it did so because it wanted to ensure nobody would profit from them. "We would like to use this opportunity to formally announce that all trademarks related to the term "Bitcoin" filed for and obtained by Tibanne K.K will be made freely available to anyone to use for whatever purpose whatsoever, whether that be for non-profit or commercial endeavours," said the company in an official statement [http://web.archive.org/web/20130523004202/https://mtgox.com/press_release_20111014.html], when the deal was originally signed.

Source: Ars Technica [http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/05/mt-gox-looks-to-raise-1-million-in-sale-of-bitcoin-trademarks/]


Permalink

 

[Schadrach]

Trademarks and IP sales for an unregulated currency? This could get spicy. Here you go kids, eventually the real world takes hold. Maybe if someone can aggressively swing some IP around it help tank the currency of choice for drug deals and pedophiles.

In any case the founding 'democracy hipster currency' vales of bit-coin continue to die a death. Then again if you know how manipulated the market already is you know Bitcoin has been a farce for years. Protip; don't buy Bitcoins kids. They are digital magic beans.

Yes, someone took out a few trademarks related to Bitcoin that are likely unenforceable (for the same reason aspirin was and Google gets angry when you use their name as a common noun). There's no other IP being sold. Unless the bitcoin trademark were found enforceable in a court (or everyone pulls what happened with D&D and things that couldn't meet d20 trademark license rules being "compatible with the most popular 20-sided fantasy role playing game" because they couldn't call themselves "d20-compatible" or "scratch-made biscuits" because someone has a trademark on "made-from-scratch").

As for being manipulated, it's as manipulated as any other entirely unregulated market, which is to say quite a lot. There's a reason financial markets are generally heavily regulated.

 

[FalloutJack]

Think they'll accept payment for that Trademark in Bitcons?

It's either that or a 'Will Sell Trademark For Food' sign. This is getting pathetic. Go find a real job, dammit!

 

[Steve the Pocket]

As for being manipulated, it's as manipulated as any other entirely unregulated market, which is to say quite a lot. There's a reason financial markets are generally heavily regulated.

Well, most financial markets at least. In a just world, the heads of Lehman Brothers and Bank of America would have been lined up and shot by now.

 

[Grabehn]

I've been explained the concept about twice already, and whenever news about the subject come up, I still ask myself what are those, I dunno if it's just me, but I completely fail to see what part of this means "real money".

 

[Kahani]

when Mt Gox registered the trademarks back in 2011, it did so because it wanted to ensure nobody would profit from them.

... except for themselves of course.

Yes, someone took out a few trademarks related to Bitcoin that are likely unenforceable (for the same reason aspirin was and Google gets angry when you use their name as a common noun)

Not really. Bayer AG was forced to give up the trademark Aspirin in the allied countries after WW1. It's still trademarked in most of the world. It's a very different situation from things like thermos and yo-yo which lost their trademark status simply through becoming popularly used words. Unless they know something we don't, Google are rather more worried about the latter than the former. And neither really apply to Bitcoin at all, since there doesn't seem to be any risk of it becoming genericised - people don't use "bitcoin" to refer to pretend currencies as a whole, only specifically to Bitcoin.

 

[FalloutJack]

I've been explained the concept about twice already, and whenever news about the subject come up, I still ask myself what are those, I dunno if it's just me, but I completely fail to see what part of this means "real money".

That's the point. By no means is it real money, and this among other things is why he's bankrupt.

Captcha: wild goose chase

This wasn't for you, Gox. Give it up!

 

[Strazdas]

And neither really apply to Bitcoin at all, since there doesn't seem to be any risk of it becoming genericised - people don't use "bitcoin" to refer to pretend currencies as a whole, only specifically to Bitcoin.

actually they do. litecoin, doge coin, kanye coin were all called bitcoins even thought bitcoin is just one type of currency. its just that everyone knows only bitcoins. its not as bad as "go google something" yet, but its kinda there