Philip K. Dick's estate lawyers up, says Nexus One name is 'clear infringement'
By Nilay Patel 
posted January 6th 2010 4:15PM
posted January 6th 2010 4:15PM
posted January 6th 2010 4:15PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
well god isn't suing APPLE for its name ..
@brolin
No but Nokia is sueing them for everything else!
http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/22/nokia-sues-apple-says-iphone-infringes-ten-patents/
@brolin
lol lol lol THATS FUNNIIIIY!!!!!
next up. Philip K. Dick's estate sues dictionary.com. i'm not sure how they can claim they "own" this term considering the word is traced back to 1655
nex⋅us
/ˈnɛksəs/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [nek-suhs] Show IPA
Use nexus in a Sentence
See web results for nexus
See images of nexus
–noun, plural nex⋅us⋅es, nex⋅us.
1. a means of connection; tie; link.
2. a connected series or group.
3. the core or center, as of a matter or situation.
4. Cell Biology. a specialized area of the cell membrane involved in intercellular communication and adhesion.
Origin:
1655–65; < L nexus a binding, joining, fastening, equiv. to nect(ere) to bind, fasten, tie + -tus suffix of v. action, with tt > s
You said "we're not sure consumers would somehow be confused into thinking there was some association between Dick and Google."
I've read enough comments to know that there are a lot of people out there who think Google ARE dicks, so there is at least the potential for confusion.
IANAL, but I already learned that whenever someone says "intellectual property rights" they either don't understand it or they don't really want you to understand. If people are sincere and really want to communicate with you about IP matters, they will tell you if it's patent, trademark, or copyright they are talking about (or maybe even a combination of the three). It's impossible to fight an "IP infringement" allegation without knowing what it's about.
In this case, Philip K. Dick's daughter seems to imply that her ownership of the copyrights to the book "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" gives her automatic trademark protection for any and all names that appear within (in this case, "Nexus").
She's wrong (for starter, copyright and trademarks are completely different and almost incompatible things). Google must defend itself (especially since it's almost sure they will win an immediate dismissal of any claims), but I don't think they will actually get sued. I'm sure that by now Isa has already learned from her lawyers that she has no case.
You will remember that Ray Bradbury tried to sue Michael Moore over "Fahrenheit 911" (but titles can't be copyrighted, besides it's not exactly the same title) or that Intel tried to sue others over "386" (but number can't be trademarked, which is why they changed to names like Pentium later on instead of "586").
This is just another case that will serve only to educate plaintiffs about the limits of their rights.
@Wanderley
+1
At least someone here is willing to educate
@Wanderley
Thanks for trying to explain it, but your discussion will go over the heads of many people on these boards.
One quibble, you can trademark a number so long as it isn't generic and so long as consumers associate the number with your product (called "secondary meaning" in trademark parlance). Intel was held to have no rights in 386 and 486 because those numbers (or any other "_86") had become generic when used in conjunction with computer processors. It was this genericide of 386 and 486 that doomed Intel's trademark rights, not the fact that they were numbers. (For example, there is a registered trademark for the number 8)
Of course, it is also very difficult to achieve secondary meaning for a number alone, and it wouldn't be very distinctive for your product, so it wouldn't be a very valuable trademark anyway.
All of this doesn't really matter, though, because I'm pretty sure that the rest of your analysis is right (I can't know 100% for sure, because I don't know too much about copyright law) and that Dick's use of the term "Nexus-6" in the text of his book gives him no trademark rights in the term. And, I am fairly certain that Nilay is correct that even if it did, there is very little liklihood of confusion here, so there wouldn't be trademark infringement anyway.
I never heard of this guy... No offense to him. If you don't own the trademark and no one knows who you are what's the point. I didn't know where the Nexus name came from, maybe him, I don't like it but he seems like he has an uphill battle.
@jasev01 Never comment online again. Thanks in advance.
@kevjohn Thanks for the geekier than thou message, but you fail. Thanks for your attempt.
"...be confused into thinking there was some association between Dick and Google."
Oh, but there is SO much association between dick and google. hahaha
Ri-dick-ulous lawsuit. (But seriously, Google must have known this was coming.)
Hi, I'm Dick Google. Pleased to meet you.
"Really, the Nexus One was our idea."
"Oh okay, google dick."
I was waiting for this. I was planning on naming my (yet to be purchased) Nexus one as "Nexus 6"
As a general rule, most estates are dicks. They are usually talentless decendants trying to milk their dead relative's cash cow. Beats having to work for a living.
Dick, just let it go. We all know you're not fighting for "intellectual property rights".
Actually... The first thing that jumped into my mind when i heard the name "Nexus One" was Blade Runner, the movie based on the book by PKDick. Nexus One is to me the first iteration of the androids produced by the Tyrell corporation. (whom i've always thought of as a futuristic Microsoft). So... yes, Google's choice of name is pressing at my liking for sci-fi masterpieces and my intrigue regarding the seemingly limitless boundaries of future technology. The name Rocks regardless...
@socritic
But, did you think that the Nexus One phone was made (or associated with) Phillip K. Dick or his estate... or did you just think it was referencing his work?
Michael Moore was clearly referencing Ray Bradbury's classic "Farenheit 451" when he titled his movie "Farenheit 911," but that doesn't mean he was committing trademark infringement.
Google vs Dick, eh?
No. Ground their patent troll ass into the ground with briefs and motions until they suffocate.
This is an example of everything that's wrong with the copyright system. A guy writes lots of books. This helps to give his kids a great living so they never have to do anything creative, and instead can focus on being money-grubbing dicks. I hope Google ruins them.
The Protoss will not be pleased.
no dude, blizzard should sue them. I am mislead that this is not a nexus teleported by probes.
Normally i would say this was a bogus suit, but given that the OS is called "Android", it seem spretty likely they thought -- "hmm what was that android called in Blade Runner?"
And fo rthat matter, I am surprised Motorola gets to call it's phone "Droid" unless they paid Lucas.
@sberfield Actually Motorola has licensed the term "Droid" from Lucas - look closely at the end of any Droid commercial and you'll see the notice at the bottom of the screen
I'm surprised Google hasn't cut a check already. The name is clearly inspired by something from the book. If Google had decided to call it the HAL-8000 I'd expect them to pay up to Arthur C. Clarke
@diss That's not the way trademark law works though. In order to have a case, the estate has to either have used the trademark in commerce for a similar product (so there's a likelihood of confusion) or have registered a trademark for a similar product. Trademark law doesn't protect blanket uses of trademarks - it's tied to what the trademark is used for.
8====D
I'll bet there are a lot of bladerunner fans who immediately winced when they heard the name of googles phone, just like I did. But there seem to be an awful lot of armchair lawyers here who know better than professonal ones....
When I first saw the title Nexus...I thought Bladerunner Nexus...thatis the first and only thought whenever I see the word..."Nexus". Especially when a number appears after it like "Nexus 6"
While they may not have any legal ground to stand on, it just doesn't seem right that Google can use this name without the estate's permission. It's quite obvious to anyone who knows the book or movie where the name came from, I made the connection instantly.
@mattcoz 'it just doesn't seem right that Google can use this name without the estate's permission"
Why? I think it is perfectly fair that Google can use "Nexus One" as a trademark, even if PKD fans and other Blade Runner geeks will think that it's a reference to "Electric Sheep". The whole point of trademark law is to (1) protect a company's goodwill associated with a trademark so that a competitor can't freeload on that goodwill; and (2) to prevent confusion among consumers that a similar product with a similar name is made by the same company. Google is not a competitor of PKD or his estate, especially in the market of mobile phones, so there is no concern about treading on PKD's goodwill associated with a trademark (if for no other reason because PKD never had trademark rights in "Nexus-6" because he didn't use it as a trademark).
Trademark laws don't let you usurp the use of language, it just prevents others from using a trademark as a label for their own products or services.
I'm surprised Lexus isn't getting in on this. I mean, there's only one letter separating their names!
Memories. You're talking about memories.
Actually I'm pretty shocked that Google hadn't notified them nor paid for the use of it...this was a blindingly obvious reference that made me laugh when I first heard the name of the phone from a tech guy at my lab. Nexus Six was the model of the androids in Blade Runner, so this is very a clearly a nod to them since Google's calling the software android to begin with.
So it's their own fault for getting some legal action on this since they clearly didn't notify the estate this was coming.
@darcet
Spoken like someone who has no understanding of the workings of trademark law. Excellent ignorance on your part!
I present to you the Gilera nexus
http://www.scooter-station.com/ttesimages/scooters/Gilera_500_Nexus_stpz.jpg
sue away!
Google should not cut a check, these guys have no case and settling will only encourage more bs lawsuits. What are you thinking Engadget?
Probably never happen but I'd love to see google counter-sue them into the ground.
I am going to make a computer company called Bladerunner, with the computer called Nexus 2, with an operating system called Android. And as a hobby, I am going to make rap records and change my name to Luke Skywalker.
Really, I'm surprised that the Blade Runner Partnership, which actually does have copyrights on most everything Blade Runner, didn't sue.
This from a friend:
During the big board meeting at Google, when they were tossing around possible names for their new phone, it was probably some Blade Runner fan that threw out "Nexus 1," as something of a joke upon hearing that it would be an Android phone. They probably ended up LOVING it, and without research on patent and trademark rights, released their product. Meanwhile, our friend the Blade Runner fan, probably kept his mouth shut at the fear of being fired, which I'm sure he has been by now.
Nexus is a common word, but I can see how 'Nexus One' is very similar to 'Nexus-9'- which was probably (in the book) a registered trademark of the fictional 'Tyrell Corporation'.
Perhaps Google should have considered alternate names- such as 'Nexus A' or 'Nexus Uno' to avoid this situation...
/sarcasm
er.. meant Nexus-6 above.