Comments on: Mail from easy.com

By: Malcolm Bastien

Malcolm Bastien — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:05:26 +0000

WTF. I’m coming to this post a bit late but I’m confused.

Does this organization honestly think they have a reasonable claim to any brand names that simply begin with the word “easy”? That’s so ridiculously broad and pompous.

As long as you don’t claim to be a part of their “Easy Group” they shouldn’t have any claim whatsoever on easyPeasy. Them actually layout out rules for you to follow is just them trying to screw you.

By: TTB

TTB — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 07:57:10 +0000

“Please note that in the event that, for example, confusion arose between your brand and our brands or you moved into a business sector in which we trade, or you did not comply with the above, then we reserve the right to take action against you.”

Sure, a mainly volunteer OS distribution will start selling airplane tickets.

By: Alastair Scott

Alastair Scott — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 15:04:55 +0000

“_it is unlikely_ that we would take action against you …” – [my emphasis] written like a true lawyer!

I wouldn’t worry. Their visual style is so distinctive, and has been plastered all over the UK for a long time (over 10 years I think), it should be easy to work round … or should that be “not hard to work around” ;)

An interesting page on their Web site though: http://www.easy.com/thieves/index.html

By: Perry Zoso

Perry Zoso — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 03:04:29 +0000

To avoid some of these possible problems, perhaps instead of “easy peasy”, you would consider a different name for the ‘ubuntu-eee’ distro. I suggest “uboseee”; it could mean ubuntu based operating system for the eee. It could mean unix based. Looking up uboseee on google returns no hits so you could quickly register a website. When people need help with their eeepc, they usually throw eee and brief text at google.
Of course, if you want it to support more umpc’s, I leave obvious name changes to readers.

By: Martin

Martin — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 08:27:39 +0000

Well, as most of the above already mentioned: don’t be too bothered about all this.

The most important thing would be that you shouldn’t blatantly violate their trademark. Which in my view would indeed constitute writing easyPeasy in Cooper Black using an orange/white theme. Staying away from Cooper Black and the orange/white combination seems most obvious to me and no problem.

As the others say, excessive claims on how to write the name could in my view be neglected. It might be wise to stick to Easy Peasy as the brand, but easy.com has no say on how the thing gets named in repositories and code to name a few. I’d also say you better not use Easy without Peasy.

The contrary would probably hold as well. easy.com should stay away from providing an OS from now on. Not that they would, but still.

Regards

By: ottogiugno

ottogiugno — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:22:23 +0000

Although the demands of this lawyer seem excessive, I suggest you to avoid using a logo that recalls (also remotely) the graphics used by easy.com, even if you could somehow.
It’s a matter of common sense and originality, and also people might think that the project could be in some way comparable to easy.com

So my suggestion is, avoid white and orange, avoid a font that looks like the one they used, but feel free to use “easypeasy” as one word, because this limitation sounds absolutely absurd.

By: Superfrog

Superfrog — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:12:26 +0000

Additionally, it they stand on their aggressive position, contact the FSF and let the people know of this e-mail… Slashdot can be very interested!

By: Superfrog

Superfrog — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:08:50 +0000

WTF?

- always use Easy Peasy as two words (I see that it is sometimes written on your website as 1 conjoined word ‘easypeasy’ – this would need to change)
–> why it has to change ? easy**** (anything) can’t be registered as a trademark who lock any possibilities!

- no use of easyPeasy (lower case ‘easy’ and capitalised ‘P’ for ‘peasy’
–> why ? this is strictly typo and can’t be registered!

- no use of orange/white
–> why ? orange/white logos aren’t their property….! what about the orange company (orange.com)… hahaha. this can’t be registered.

- no use of our font (known as cooper black)
–> why ? this isn’t their font, this is a linotype one (http://www.linotype.com/317123/cooperblack-family.html). this is not their property… and, the guys at linotype will be very interested to know that easy.com loose their property and interests…

- then we reserve the right to take action against you
–> under which law/country ? i doubt norway laws falls under these non-sense trademarks rules!

JON, THIS IS A PERSUASIVE E-MAIL ONLY ! DO NOT TAKE THIS ONE AS THEY WANT YOU TO DO !

This is a completely BULLSHIT! Any lawyer must be laughing reading their e-mail!

Thanks easyGroup and Kristen Doherty to make us laugh loud!

By: burtdayt

burtdayt — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 19:38:41 +0000

Un-friking-believable !!!

If you have the resources, hire a trademark attorney.

Jesus !

Will people ever just let you be who you want to be ???!!!!

– Burt B.

By: macs

macs — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:20:20 +0000

wow, so orange color is a trademark of easy.com? great :D

By: Serola

Serola — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 19:53:54 +0000

I hope easy.com don’t object logos with lower case e :(

By: tasso

tasso — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:04:13 +0000

well, I suggest you to create (maybe with the help of a lawyer) an how-to with all the rules to avoid problems with easy.com, Asus and Canonical, and put it on the wiki.

I like orange logos… :(