Apparently IMAddict.com got hit with this letter recently (the letter is posted on the home page). I actually think it is quite funny. I personally don't like the guy that runs the site (don't get me wrong his content that does not have rude "opinions" in it is great). I don't know about any one else but I would not go about bragging I got one of these letters (as tons of sites do anyways). What does everyone else think.
PS. I believe Big-O is safe since they do not use the term to imply any other IM program (I think I can say it as I do not repersent a company ).
IMAddict.com wrote:IMaddict Current Issues
RE: Use of mark INSTANT MESSENGER
Dear Mr. Preseau:
We represent America Online, Inc. ("AOL") and its affiliates, with respect to intellectual property matters. Our client owns the marks INSTANT MESSENGER and AOL INSTANT MESSENGER. AOL has made extensive use of these marks in interstate and international commerce since at least as early as March 1997 in connection with our client's real-time communications services. Due to the widespread use, advertising, and extensive marketing, the marks INSTANT MESSENGER and AOL INSTANT MESSENGER have become famous, and customers and prospective customers recognize these marks as distinctive symbols of our client's goodwill.
It has come to our attention that you are operating a Web site at "imaddict.com" that uses our client's mark INSTANT MESSENGER in a generic manner. See, for example, <http://www.imaddict.com/survey.php>. We are concerned that the generic manner in which our client's mark is used may confuse consumers and lead them to believe that our client's mark is a generic term to define or describe a particular service or software. We recommend instead identifying the services as a "real time communications service."
We hope that you appreciate AOL's interest in protecting its intellectual property and making sure that consumers are not misled or confused as to the source of any products or services offered by AOL, or any similar mark. To protect against such confusion, we request that you cease all improper uses of our client's mark INSTANT MESSENGER.
They want him to stop using the term "Instant Messenger" as if it is more then two products (don't forget ICQ). As long as he stops using it in that frame of mind he can continue to use the term. In other words they don't care if they promote AIM and ICQ, just if they promote Yahoo, and Microsoft.
Here is how the webmaster replied (on site).
IMAddict.com wrote:LOL.....so.....where do I even start with this one? Those old fuddy duddy's are now just catching on that this site is around? Jeebus....here's a new question for my quiz. Have you ever filed a lawsuit because AOL puts its fucking icons all over your desktop and you can't get rid of the Playing A Game away message? Didn't think so.
I hope they don't expect me to go through and recode all of the pages that say that.....cuz damn I really don't have time to do that. I'm lucky if I update the featured addict once a week.
So yeah....do me a favor and find out if I'm really screwed or not. Better yet, call your nearest lawyer and help me out on this one. The address is administrator@imaddict.com if you know of a lawyer who can do some free research. I'm too lazy to change all of these pages. Come on AOHell, gimme a break here.
To me the simplest solution would be to do is replace all the instances of "Instant Messenger" with "Instant Messaging Application". I'm sorry, but Yahoo has "Yahoo Instant Messenger", M$ has "MSN Instant Messenger" and "Windows Instant Messenger". So you could make the case that "Instant Messeging Application" was a valid generic term.
The webmaster of IMAddict better step to it or the next letter may be one informing him that they are coming for his assets.
First off I think AOL is sad in the fact that they are doing that. I see noughint wrong with it. To me this is just another reason to hate aol. it is item 1,123 on the list of reason
harra wrote:The webmaster of IMAddict better step to it or the next letter may be one informing him that they are coming for his assets.
True I would not dare step up to AOL in this fashion, however I don't think he has any assets as far as a company (I may be wrong), and if he is smart this is a legal company which would limit any lawsuit for money to money that is actually in the company (well that is how my mom's business is set up anyways).
harra wrote:The webmaster of IMAddict better step to it or the next letter may be one informing him that they are coming for his assets.
True I would not dare step up to AOL in this fashion, however I don't think he has any assets as far as a company (I may be wrong), and if he is smart this is a legal company which would limit any lawsuit for money to money that is actually in the company (well that is how my mom's business is set up anyways).
He is only protected if he company is a corpation other wise he is lieble for all suits brought against him. Your mom compainy is set up as a corp that is way only the company can be sued and not the owners.
PhaseDMA wrote:however I don't think he has any assets as far as a company (I may be wrong), and if he is smart this is a legal company which would limit any lawsuit for money to money that is actually in the company (well that is how my mom's business is set up anyways).
if this guy isn't incorporated in anyway, he has assets. He has a car, he has money in the bank. The only way to protect your butt in business disasters is to be incorporated (I'm sure there are varying degrees of incorporation like what Anthony's mom is doing). But if you don't do that, your company and yourself are considered one and the same legal entity. If you do incorporate, the company and yourself are two separate legal entities. Translation, they can get everything in your name if you aren't incorporated and they win a big $ lawsuit against you.
I just look at the quiz and took it. I still trying to see how anything wrong with it. One question is do you have any instant messager program other than AIM. Also I think we should all take the test
The problem is you can't use the words "Instant Messenger" unless you put AOL in front of it. They hold the trademark for those words. People tend to call things by their most famous trademark. For example:
The problem is you can't use the words "Instant Messenger" unless you put AOL in front of it. They hold the trademark for those words. People tend to call things by their most famous trademark. For example:
Master Jedi wrote:The only problem with that is "Instant Messenger" is already a generic term...I think that's why AOL is upset.
Just like all those other products that I mentioned before. In the blink of an eye, the term "Instant Messenger" became synonymous with the type of application, not the product owned by AOL.
Master Jedi wrote:The only problem with that is "Instant Messenger" is already a generic term...I think that's why AOL is upset.
Good. I'm glad their pissed.
AOL just a power hunger corp. Hell Cokecolla does not care that Coke is a genral term for all carbnated drinks.
also I been using Instand messager or IM genicel for years. One of hte question I will ask some time is "what Instand messager do you us. OR what IM do you us? very genric. AOL is dreaming if it thinks that it can keep Instance message it own. Hell ICQ was the first IM program out there. and when I talking about AOL intant message I just say AIM (aim)
).
Die AOL Die!! Haha.