The next Youtube problem- Trademark Infringement takedowns

[Devin]

What do verified channels have to do with it? There are plenty of trademarked companies/ products out there and not all of them have an affiliated YouTube channel. Try opening a channel with a previously trademarked name and it likely won't be pretty.

Because i thought verified channels kept impersonation down. I see what you mean though. Hmm that's a little scary hopefully my name isn't trademark or I'm screwed. I'm literally DevinY1 everywhere

 

[MarkRodriguez2012]

Exactly, the guys who made the Food Chasers show also had no idea some company made a Food Chasers app.

 

[Shakycow]

Exactly, the guys who made the Food Chasers show also had no idea some company made a Food Chasers app.

Which is their fault for not properly researching a name they wanted to use.

At the very least, it takes all of 5 seconds to do a Google search. Had they taken the moment, they would have seen that the name had been in use already.

I still fail to see how this is a problem, anything new, or a YouTube issue.

 

[KiddieToysReview]

I saw a video about these guys named The Game Chasers have a secondary channel with a sub show called the Food Chasers. It seems some company that just so happens to make an app called Food Chasers saw this and went to Youtube and had the videos taken down. As always, shoot first, ask questions later, Youtube left the Game Chasers confused with a big WTF look on their faces since they never heard of Trademark Infringement Takedowns on Youtube before, nor have they ever heard of their small company with their fail of an app. This kinda worries me because some other company or whatever that decides to also call themselves the Video Game Masters or The Review Cauldron and so forth might just appear out of nowhere and blindside me with takedowns. Thoughts on this?

Check out this resource:
Circular 34 from the United States Copyright Office.
www.copyright.gov/circs/circ34.pdf



Based on this, I doubt the phrase 'food chasers' is protected. However, they can certainly register a typeface and logo with those words in them, in a particular section for their goods or services. But they can't own the words 'food chasers' across all services and products in the English language.

 

[Shakycow]

Check out this resource:
Circular 34 from the United States Copyright Office.

Based on this, I doubt the phrase 'food chasers' is protected. However, they can certainly register a typeface and logo with those words in them, in a particular section for their goods or services. But they can't own the words 'food chasers' across all services and products in the English language.

Your quote is regarding Copyright, not trademark...where phrases, as the name of a company or a tag line, are covered.

https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts.pdf

• A trademark is generally a word, phrase, symbol, or design, or a combination thereof, that identifes and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
  
  
• A service mark is the same as a trademark, except that it identifes and distinguishes the source of a service rather than goods. roughout this booklet, the terms “trademark” and “mark” refer to both trademarks and service marks.
  

 

[KiddieToysReview]

Your quote is regarding Copyright, not trademark...where phrases, as the name of a company or a tag line, are covered.

https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts.pdf

• A trademark is generally a word, phrase, symbol, or design, or a combination thereof, that identifes and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
  
  
• A service mark is the same as a trademark, except that it identifes and distinguishes the source of a service rather than goods. roughout this booklet, the terms “trademark” and “mark” refer to both trademarks and service marks.

Good point, but atitle would come under Copright law, not Trademark law.

For example, I can write a book and call it "Twilight". This is irrespective of any trademarks the author might have. The author can not copyright the word 'twilight' nor prevent it's use as the title of a book or any other media.

For titles of videos, you can use pretty much anything. That's why there are titles with the words 'Disney Frozen Elsa and Spiderman get married' videos. Those clearly impinge on trademarks, but are protected under Circular 34 for titles only. I hope this is correct ?!?!

 

[Shakycow]

Good point, but atitle would come under Copright law, not Trademark law.

For example, I can write a book and call it "Twilight". This is irrespective of any trademarks the author might have. The author can not copyright the word 'twilight' nor prevent it's use as the title of a book or any other media.

For titles of videos, you can use pretty much anything. That's why there are titles with the words 'Disney Frozen Elsa and Spiderman get married' videos. Those clearly impinge on trademarks, but are protected under Circular 34 for titles only. I hope this is correct ?!?!

There is a big difference between using 'Disney Frozen Elsa and Spiderman get married' and 'Disney Presents- Frozen Elsa and Spiderman get married'

Their naming their channel the same as a trademarked name gives the impression that the two are connected and that the channel is representative of the company when it isn't. Likewise, you wouldn't be authorized to name a channel Nike or Apple.