Hahahahahahahahah good fucking luck with that WWE, you’re big, but you’re not rockstar big.
“Apple” (the company) has trademarks such as the word “Apple”. And it only works in context of computers. Competitors in example can’t name themselves “Apple”, but you can have in a different buisness than computers a name that contains “Apple”, such as “Apple Hill Cider” or “Apple Leisure Group”. That would not violate the trademark. Trademarks are only a problem if its in the same business.
Wrestling is not videogames (although there are videogames of it) and therefore cannot be confused with a videogame. So this could workout in theory.
WWE makes a wrestling game ever single year.
WWE makes a wrestling game ever single year.
I already said they are doing videogames too “(although there are videogames of it)”. It does not mean they have to use the name “Vice City” in the game titles too. WWE itself is not videogames.
Rockstar:
It’s only within the context of professional wrestling. Verizon has a trademark on the color red, but it’s only within the context of cell phones.
On the other hand, Sky TV somehow managed to successfully sue Microsoft to force them to rename SkyDrive.
World Wildlife Fund successfully got WWF to switch to WWE. Now they have to blur out their own logo on old matches. It’s quite bizarre.
I always found that odd. You’d have to be a serious nonce to conflate dramatized wrestling with wildlife conservation, but here we are.
On September 12, 1989, the Federation sent a letter to the Fund addressing its federal trademark application for the “WWF” mark in International Class 41 (for wrestling entertainment services). The International Class 41 also includes education, which the Fund were registered in. This marked the beginning of formal discussions between the two parties regarding the use of the “WWF” initials.
They reached an agreement, but once wrestling started putting stiff on the Internet, that effectively broke that agreement.
I’m just going off memory, but sky tv already provided computer-related services and products in Britain, so it’s not unreasonable for them not to want another company essentially using their name for a product that could quite easily be confused as to being associated with them
Especially with how things went the last time a tech company was at odds with a British company over a name. Apple Records
The Beatles got quite a lot of cash from Apple when they started selling music through iTunes, right?
Is that relevant to Apple breaking the agreement that they’d never get into music, of they were allowed to continue using the name?
Yeah I think so (I had to look it up though!)
Between 1978 and 2007, there were a number of legal disputes between Apple Corps (owned by the Beatles) and the computer manufacturer Apple Computer (now Apple Inc.) over competing trademark rights, specifically over the use of the name “Apple” and their respective logos which consist of a profile of an apple. Apple Inc. paid Apple Corps. over three settlements: $80,000 in 1978, $26.5 million in 1991, and $500 million in 2007, when Apple Inc. acquired all the trademarks related to “Apple”.
These are settlements for breach of trademark, not proceeds for selling their music like you seemed to be saying in your initial comment
Its also a very hyper specific hex code of red, and any minor difference even a single hex digit difference is enough to not infringe, unless it is in combination with other marks they have.
They dont have just “red,” its like they have exactly #FF0A0A or whatever.
Business colors are very specific and deviate from other types of protection marks like that, for good reason. They need the extra “resolution.” (IYKYK)
Still, to what end?
I assume it’s a new tag team, or something along those lines. This makes it so a rival promoter can’t use the same name for a different tag team, or sell competing merchandise. That sort of thing. Someone could still open “Vice City Coffee Co.” and sell shirts and it wouldn’t be directly competing with them at all.
Another big reason why they do this, is now WWE owns the name of the tag team. So if the wrestlers leave for a rival promotion, they can’t use the name anymore. WWE doesn’t let wrestlers use their own name anymore, it needs to be a new name that WWE gets to copyright. “Roman Reigns” is a copy protected character owned by WWE.
WWE currenty has a
wrestlerSuperstar going by Lola Vice and Vice City has been used in relation to her. She recently left their developmental brand and is heading to the main roster, so WWE will probably be selling Vice City shirts to fans.Wild and super ick.
I hate Eric Bischoff but I loved that era. NWO was one of the funniest things I’d ever seen.
They should bring that back for Halloween or something.
They were just trying to protect us from seeing videos of people emotionally responding to things that weren’t blessed (in financial form) by them. You know, they invented that
The items listed in the “Goods and Services” section of the link are wrestling/sports entertainment related, so this should not conflict Rockstar’s trademarks around GTA Vice City, if that’s what you’re thinking.
Was about to say, isn’t that the same shit that brought about the WWE from the WWF.
