![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/db7182d9-181a-45e1-b0aa-6768f144911a.jpeg)
Hey, just FYI, the term is actually “moot”.
Not trying to be rude, I just I know I prefer to be told about stuff like this ❤️
Hey, just FYI, the term is actually “moot”.
Not trying to be rude, I just I know I prefer to be told about stuff like this ❤️
If that were the case then the other statements within bullet 1 are completely irrelevant, and the relevant information has been omitted. That would be a far greater assumption than taking the statements at face value and connecting the information we have into coherent logic
TBH that’s a logic fail on your part.
In bullet point (1) we have two important statements
Statement A: “I can’t make the food”
Followed immediately by the explanation…
Statement B: “I am dealing with an illness that makes me unable to eat solid foods and extremely sensitive to smells”
The only way Statements A and B can be related is via the smell. Being unable to EAT solid foods wouldn’t prevent OP from MAKING the food. The only possible explanation is that the sensitivity to smell is what makes them unable.
That’s, like, really basic reading comprehension skills. 🤷
Oh boy, let’s take this piece by piece…
DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT A LAWYER AND THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
First: let’s talk about the difference between copyright, patents, and trademark
A patent protects a method of doing something - like a novel piece of code, or a newly invented drug formula - from being duplicated and used or sold without your consent.
Copyright protects creative works - like art, books, and computer software - from being mimiced. It literally deals with the rights to copy something
Trademark protects brands - like a logo or company name - from being used by other people for profit. It usually deals with marketplace confusion, as when someone creates a competing product with a similar logo to try to benefit from the logo’s recognition and popularity.
So, with that said, what are YOU dealing with?
Well, since you’re not selling software or utilizing anything from the WatchDogs game universe, you’re pretty much free and clear on both patent and copyright.
What about trademark?
Well, on the one hand, you are not competing with Ubisoft in any way, nor are you attempting to represent yourself as related to WatchDogs. So, by the letter of the law (in the US), they don’t have a valid complaint.
However, trademark under US law has this funny feature where an entity that holds a trademark is required to vigorously defend it when they become aware of potential infringement. This is to prevent the selective application of trademark. That is, if I know John is using my trademark and I don’t go after him, then Steve uses my trademark too, I can’t suddenly claim to have an interest in defending it when I didn’t care before. Steve can point at the fact that I didn’t go after John and say “you already gave up your trademark by failing to enforce it”.
So how does this impact you? Well, unfortunately, even if you are technically allowed to use “dedsec” under US law, if Ubisoft has a trademark on the term “dedsec” specifically, AND if someone at Ubisoft became aware of your use of their trademark, they would likely come after you for trademark infringement just to cover their ass. You might even win in court, but it would cost a whole lot of money that you would likely never be able to recover.
The good news is that the very first step in a trademark dispute is a cease and desist letter. They’ll demand you stop using their trademark. At that point you can either comply, refuse, or offer to settle the matter by selling them the domain.
What you do with this information is up to you.
And all the people saying “but the lower courts get to decide if it’s an official act” are ignoring the fact that the courts are so slow it won’t even matter, all the damage will be long done