http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/ Engadget Comments for BlackBerry versus BlackJack: RIM sues Samsung for trademark infringement http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 8:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
If I knew you in person I'd so give you a cookie :P.]]>Dec 10th 2006 6:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 8:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
This would be like Apple suing anybody who had the letter "i" before their product name.

Money Hungry anyone?]]>Dec 10th 2006 3:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
Ooooh, right, it's a joke, I get it.]]>Dec 10th 2006 3:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/"Blackberry versus BlackJack: RIM s"
I thought that RIM must have relased a new toy and this would be a feature comparison.

so, yes. the name is confusing.
and i am SURE that was intentional.
]]>Dec 10th 2006 3:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 4:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 3:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
A few examples:

Profit Pod - http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3482

Podcast Ready - http://blog.wired.com/music/2006/09/apple_hits_podc.html?entry_id=1561308

Tight Pod - http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3489

]]>Dec 10th 2006 4:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 4:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
This isn't so much the Consumer, because the Consumer is going to be mostly sure of what they want from word of mouth. The thing is, it's going to be the sales people they ask in the stores, who are at least equally ignorant to the differences and just want to move the product, that will get them to buy it instead, explaining how they aren't all that "different", or so that's how I see it.]]>Dec 10th 2006 6:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
When I saw the end of this article headline, I assumed Moto was suing Samsung for the very real similarities between the Blackjack and the Q. The suit would at least have some merit.]]>Dec 10th 2006 4:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 4:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 4:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 4:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 4:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 11th 2006 1:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 5:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 5:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 5:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 5:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 5:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 6:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 5:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
Of course, I only watch the cell phone market from afar and watch for neat things just to forget them later.]]>Dec 10th 2006 6:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
RIM's case is pretty much rock solid. Naming their smartphone device "BlackJack" was a gutsy, risky move on Samsung's part. RIM didn't blink. So sad for Samsung. But not too sad, they'll settle.]]>Dec 10th 2006 6:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 6:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 6:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
Samsung has a nice product. Blackberry (RIM) like Apple is being petty.]]>Dec 15th 2006 11:27AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 7:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
1. An Apple phone that runs on Sprint
2. A Samsung Blackjack that runs on Sprint
3. A Q that runs on Sprint (on it's way) that has fixed some of the problems that exist on other carriers' version of the Q.

]]>Dec 10th 2006 7:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
"Infringement may occur when one party, the "infringer", uses a trademark which is identical or confusingly similar to a registered trademark owned by another party, in relation to products or services which are identical or similar to the products or services which the registration covers. An owner of a registered trademark may commence legal proceedings against a party which infringes its registration." -Wikipedia

It really isn't ridiculous. And using comparisons to Apple and the letter "i" at the beginning of the name isn't very relevant. Unless a competitor of Apple uses the "i" in a product name to confuse consumers. Such as an iBox which plays MP3s...That's confusion, and would merit a lawsuit.]]>Dec 10th 2006 7:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
;)]]>Dec 10th 2006 7:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 8:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
especially if the second letter was capitalized and the whole thing was in Apple's standard font.. oh yeah... that would be bs...]]>Dec 10th 2006 8:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/



Damn. You lied to me. I booked marked it and everything. Wahoo scott, I hereby ban you from engadget. ]]>Dec 12th 2006 5:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
1. Similarity of the conflicting marks;
2. Relatedness or proximity of the two companies;
3. Strength of the senior users mark;
4. Marketing channels used;
5. Degree of care likely to be used by purchasers in selecting the goods;
6. The "second comers" intent in selecting its mark;
7. Evidence of actual confusion;
8. Likelihood of expansion in product lines

now, can any of you really say that this suit is meritless, or that you wouldn't do the same if you were rim?

]]>Dec 10th 2006 8:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
Are you retarded?

From RIM's website: Used by thousands of organizations around the world, the BlackBerry device is a revolutionary communication tool that allows mobile professionals to send and receive email wherever they go.

BLACKBERRY DEVICE... It's not the OS.
]]>Dec 10th 2006 8:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/
Model #: SGH-I605
Description: Samsung BlackJack(tm)

This tells us two things-- Samsung has applied for a trademark for the product name BlackJack for a cellular device and that application has been accepted for consideration, with the presumption that a registered trademark will be granted. It may not be, hence the (tm) instead of the (r). It also tells us that they could market it and sell it as the I605 very easily, just by changing the box and the advertisements, if need be.

My take, a shrewd move on their part. They applied for the trademark and if granted, sorry RIM. If not, they change the box and ads. In the meantime, because of the press, everyone will talk about the new Blackberry-like phone from Samsung...

Incidentally, I like this phone better than the 8700c and the Pearl at the moment. But that's neither here nor there.]]>Dec 10th 2006 10:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 8:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 11th 2006 4:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/10/blackberry-versus-blackjack-rim-sues-samsung-for-trademark-infr/Dec 10th 2006 9:31PM