Slashdot Mirror


Russian Hopes To Cash In On Emoticons

drewmoney writes "According to a BBC article, Entrepreneur Oleg Teterin said the trademark for the ';-)' emoticon was granted to him by Russia's federal patent agency. 'Legal use will be possible after buying an annual licence from us,' he was quoted by the newspaper Kommersant as saying. 'It won't cost that much — tens of thousands of dollars,' added the businessman, who is president of Superfone, a company that sells advertising on mobile phones. The president of Russian social networking site odnoklassniki.ru, Nikita Sherman said: 'You're not likely to find any retards in Russia who'll pay Superfone for the use of emoticons.'" Teterin may have gotten the idea by catching up on some old news about Despair, Inc., which in May 2000 was awarded a US trademark on the "frowny" emoticon (Slashdot story).

213 comments

  1. Provocation by MadDogX · · Score: 5, Funny

    :-) ... Am I doin it rite?

    1. Re:Provocation by raymansean · · Score: 1

      what is next ASCII art?

      --
      insert inflammatory comment here!
    2. Re:Provocation by sadgoblin · · Score: 2, Funny

      KGB is watching you.

    3. Re:Provocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ceiling cat is watching you violating trademark symbols.

    4. Re:Provocation by Haley's+Comet · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey Oleg Teterin, "Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you..." ;-)


      The IP patent race is the new 'Special Olypics'...

      --
      The Illuminati would kill me, but I'm not rich enough to take notice of.
    5. Re:Provocation by theaveng · · Score: 1

      No. It's a winking smiley. Yours is not winking.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    6. Re:Provocation by iammani · · Score: 1, Redundant

      No you are not ;-)

    7. Re:Provocation by nerdboy7186 · · Score: 1

      for the Russian :-) and a fuck you to him as well

      --
      May the crabs of 1000 whores infest the crotch of the one that fucks up your day
    8. Re:Provocation by iammani · · Score: 2, Funny

      Redundant? Its strange that some mods think :-) = ;-)

    9. Re:Provocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they thought it was redundant because your post came 8 minutes after the one directly above it which points out the same thing.

    10. Re:Provocation by spazdor · · Score: 1

      Even if you win, you're still a troll?

      --
      DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
    11. Re:Provocation by Roman+Mamedov · · Score: 1

      Yes. ^_^

    12. Re:Provocation by Hordeking · · Score: 1

      No you are not ;-)

      Pay me. I have a patent on winky smileys.

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions and actions of the US Gov't are in no way representative of those held by this author or its ci
    13. Re:Provocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if you win, you're still a troll?

      He said Olympics not Trollympics.

    14. Re:Provocation by nachosupreme · · Score: 0

      yes you are...now tell me where to find Moose and Squirel!

    15. Re:Provocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He also said since other similar emoticons - :-) or ;) or :) - resemble the one he has trademarked, use of those symbols could also fall under his ownership.

      how about this one: 8===3 ?

  2. Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by theaveng · · Score: 4, Informative

    What lame-brain dummy would think that either :-( or ;-) are trademarkable symbols??? They both originated circa 1980 and therefore are public domain.

    --
    FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    1. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Sebilrazen · · Score: 4, Funny
      There's a popular meme around here that applies, I just can't figure out which one:
      • Does it run linux?
      • I, for one, welcome our new ? overlords.
      • In Soviet Russia, ? you!
      • ?????
      • Profit.
      --
      "There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
    2. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      This Russian isn't the first to claim to have invented the smiley.

      (It's quite a long file. Begin at line 317.)

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    3. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Patent office = zoo filled with interns, people fired from other better paid but higher requirement jobs, clueless friends of state-employed lowest-grade clerks and idiots unable to find any better job.

      The job of a patent examiner is low-pay, low-qualifications, sucks major ass and is the low of the low you can get, so no wonder there are very few competent people doing it.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    4. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by JJJK · · Score: 5, Funny

      you forgot "you insensitive clod", you insensitive clod!

    5. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by edittard · · Score: 1

      What lame-brain dummy would think that either :-( or ;-) are trademarkable symbols???

      The Russian patent agency, for one.

      Did I just say patent agency? I certainly did, and so did TFS.

      --
      At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
    6. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice, you get a +5 funny with a text you can include in every single thread (i.e. off-topic). Expect to read this post again... several times!

    7. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of ;-) ... now available in limited quantities from a Russian start-up I hear.

    8. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Grimbleton · · Score: 4, Funny

      You must be new here.

    9. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      Age is irrelevant for trademark. What's relevant is whether the general public associate the mark with your brand / company. On this criterion his claim is invalid.

    10. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2, Informative

      What lame-brain dummy would think that either :-( or ;-) are trademarkable symbols??? They both originated circa 1980 and therefore are public domain.

      I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Perhaps Russian trademark law is different, but in the US, at least, it doesn't matter who creates the mark, or when it was created. What basically makes a mark protectable is that it is being used to identify goods or services so marked as originating from a particular source.

      The word 'apple' has been around for hundreds of years, and wasn't coined by the two Steves but it is a trademark for computers. The name 'Levi' has been around for thousands of years, but it is a trademark for jeans.

      Assuming that someone makes :-) brand something-or-others (or offers services under the :-) brand) and people recognize that the smiley is actually a mark in that context, meaning that so-marked goods or services come from a particular provider, then sure, it can work.

      But it wouldn't affect other uses of it, like people talking about emotional states, any more than the APPLE mark for computers prevents people from using the word freely with regard to fruit.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    11. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Chrisq · · Score: 2, Insightful

      May be true, but that's got nothing to do with trademarks.

    12. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If you don't like it, go to Russia!" ...

      Wait a second...

    13. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      There's a popular meme around here that applies, I just can't figure out which one:
      • Does it run linux?
      • I, for one, welcome our new ? overlords.
      • In Soviet Russia, ? you!
      • ?????
      • Profit
    14. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the "?????" one, as in "How in the @#%!!%! does this guy expect to get anyone to actually pay?????"

    15. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1, Funny

      On Slashdot, only old people use the "insensitive clod" meme.

    16. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      There's a popular meme around here that applies, I just can't figure out which one:
      • Does it run linux?
      • I, for one, welcome our new ?? overlords.
      • In Soviet Russia, ? you!
      • ?????
      • Profit.
    17. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Get off my lawn you insensitive clod!

    18. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Irony of the matter, check the UID...

    19. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of ;-) ... now available in limited quantities from a Russian start-up I hear.

      It comes with a free (as in beer) pint of hot grits down your pants.

    20. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Catiline · · Score: 3, Funny

      In Soviet Russia, new smiley overlords profit??? from YOU! Oh, wait....

    21. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by porcupine8 · · Score: 1

      Probably the same kind of person who would think a common word like "apple" is trademarkable. Y'know, a totally normal person who is correct. It takes a special kind of idiot, though, to think that that means no one can ever, ever use the word/emoticon in any context again without paying them.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    22. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by xouumalperxe · · Score: 1

      The whole "oh noes, public domain" argument applies to copyright, or to patents -- not to trademarks. I think that nobody in their right mind will disagree that your company has a right to its own image, and that trying to piggyback on it is wrong. This is obviously a scare tactic, because nobody trades under the ':-)', and, if these guys don't either, their trademark will soon be unenforceable. But it's still legitimate, as a concept, to trademark the symbol.

      The real question here is: in what context did they apply for a trademark in? AFAIK, trademarks are domain-specific, which is why Apple Records and Apple Computers lived side by side for so long without issue. Only when Apple Computers got into the music domain did conflict come up again. Reversely, the :-( emoticon is pretty generic and in common use, but its use as Despair, Inc's logo is quite distinctive, representative of their products, and readily identifies the company -- just like you don't have any problem telling an actual apple fruit and either Apple company apart.

    23. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by mea37 · · Score: 1

      This story seems surrounded by confusion about what trademarks are and how they work.

      To be fair, I'm working from the American concept and assuming the Russian concept is comparable; if not, then it shouldn't be translated as "trademark"...

      In any case, "public domain" has nothing to do with whether you can trademark something. The "age" of a mark (when it was first used) doesn't really matter.

      What the businessman is trying to do is stupid (or, more likely, is a ploy that depends on other people being ill-informed), but not for the reasons you suggest. Trademark doesn't create the same type of monopoly that copyright does. I don't have to pay McDonalds to say "chicken mcnugget", and I dno't have to pay this guy to say :-).

    24. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by imboboage0 · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, memes use you.

      I, for one, welcome our new meme overlords.

      --
      Honesty may be the best policy, but by process of elimination, dishonesty is the second best policy.
    25. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      The same kind that awarded me first place for my emoticon pumpkin. They seriously had never seen an emoticon before. I was ... speechless. And I had to in good conscious kick my own ass, for using an emoticon.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    26. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by venivediveci · · Score: 1

      Doesn't use in common language invalidate a trademark anyway? For example, when google filed its IPO, they listed as a risk that their trademark could become common language, and therefore be invalidated.

    27. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Get insensitive clod off lawn
      2. ???
      3. Profit? What profit? Are you mad? ;-)

    28. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clearly don't comprehend how trademarks work. There's no "prior art".

    29. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      What lame-brain dummy would think that either :-( or ;-) are trademarkable symbols??? They both originated circa 1980 and therefore are public domain.

      Trademark isn't patent or copyright, and origin is of comparatively little concern. Colors have been trademarked. A trademark is not universal, it limits, mostly, promotional use of the mark in a specific domain of trade (hence, "trademark"), the protection exists principally to prevent misleading trading that confuses consumers.

    30. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by thegnu · · Score: 1

      lol, offtopic.

      --
      Please stop stalking me, bro.
    31. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On Slashdot, only old people use the "insensitive clod" meme.

      Duly noted. Now get off my lawn!

    32. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by twakar · · Score: 1

      what could possibly go wrong?

      --
      Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity!
    33. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by belmolis · · Score: 1

      Precisely. If this guy has a valid trademark, it must be for products in one or more industry segments. Since the normal use of emoticons is not to identify products or companies of any sort, his trademark is irrelevant. It's just like the fact that I can't sell software or game stations and call call them "Microsoft", but if I choose to use "Microsoft" as an expression indicating exasperation or disbelief or some such thing, I am perfectly free to do so.

    34. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ;-) in (Soviet) Russia, emoticon owns YOU ;-)

      ;-) .. oh no, that last one has "made in china" stamped inside the comma. Not genuine,move on..

    35. Re:Patent Office == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No irony, I've been reading /. for years, I only semi-recently registered.

  3. lol by kevind23 · · Score: 1

    I should patent "lol". I'd be rich from the 13-year-olds alone!

    1. Re:lol by Aerynvala · · Score: 1

      That's okay, I'd just spell it LOL and be free and clear ;)

      --
      http://transformativeworks.org/
    2. Re:lol by ubrgeek · · Score: 1

      That's a very valid point and I appreciate your sharing it. Now that you've done so...

      kthxbye(c)

      --
      Bark less. Wag more.
    3. Re:lol by Aerynvala · · Score: 1

      Oh you're most welcome! cul8r(c)

      --
      http://transformativeworks.org/
    4. Re:lol by Colourspace · · Score: 1

      Be sure to patent the meaning as well as the letters... My Mum is convinced it means 'lots of love'...

    5. Re:lol by bluesatin · · Score: 1

      Oh ffs(c) guys, stop stealing all the good acronyms damnit!

    6. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stfu(c) and gtfo(c)

    7. Re:lol by kevind23 · · Score: 1

      I'd trademark the letters and patent the act of "laughing out loud."

  4. Silly patent, what's next ? by T-BoneX · · Score: 1

    This is crazy, is this for serious..... ?
    Who own the patent on numbers/letters/symbols or language ?
    I am going to patent free will :) :) :), oops there goes my bank account.

    1. Re:Silly patent, what's next ? by Gandalf_Greyhame · · Score: 1

      screw that! I'm gonna patent the production and distribution of dihydrogen-monoxide

      and while I'm at it, I'm also going to apply for a patent for breathing in oxygen, and dispelling carbon-dioxide

      --
      I am not stubborn. I am right!
  5. Fine with me by Golddess · · Score: 3, Funny

    I never put noses on my emoticons anyway ;)

    --
    "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    1. Re:Fine with me by Andr+T. · · Score: 5, Funny
      RTFA. You're doomed.

      He also said since other similar emoticons - :-) or ;) or :) - resemble the one he has trademarked, use of those symbols could also fall under his ownership.

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    2. Re:Fine with me by tchiseen · · Score: 1

      Me either ;) ;) Tough nuts for this chap :P But really though, I invented this smiley :Oo It's FOSS though.

    3. Re:Fine with me by EvilIdler · · Score: 1

      So does that mean Apple will have to pay this moron for Objective-C's documentation?

    4. Re:Fine with me by danieltdp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just put a mustache on it, like this ;-} Syntacticly is similar, but semantically different: it's not someone blinking, it's a guy with a mustache blinking!

      --
      -- dnl
    5. Re:Fine with me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i prefer mine with a "very happy mustachioed man blinking" ;-{D

    6. Re:Fine with me by jlarocco · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should RTFA where the guy specifically says he's only going to go after companies using the symbols to make money.

    7. Re:Fine with me by suggsjc · · Score: 4, Funny

      I had a couple of mod points, but I honestly couldn't decide between funny and insightful. Either way, I'm going to start using this one: =[:~;X(---[

      I'm not exactly sure what it is, but I think there is a top hat and a bowtie in there somehow.

      --
      When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
    8. Re:Fine with me by danieltdp · · Score: 1

      Your is more like a regular expression to me... A malformed one, BTW (unclosed groups and captures)

      --
      -- dnl
    9. Re:Fine with me by Andr+T. · · Score: 1

      I did read it, but if I mentioned it, I'd lose a joke.

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    10. Re:Fine with me by BrotherBeal · · Score: 1

      It's Abraham Lincoln with indigestion.

      --
      I'm disabling ads until because I choose not to reward redesigns that are less usable than "view source".
    11. Re:Fine with me by SharpFang · · Score: 5, Funny

      You asshole, I ran this as a Perl program and it erased my hard drive.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    12. Re:Fine with me by Harinezumi · · Score: 1

      Considering that nowadays, Russians just use ) or ))) for the emoticon, programmers may have a problem here

    13. Re:Fine with me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA. You're doomed.

      other similar emoticons - :-)

      what, the ones with a mohawk too?

    14. Re:Fine with me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FOS maybe, but I'm not quite sure I see how it qualifies as software :P

      What's it supposed to be anyway? Kinda looks like a person trying to eat a doughnut.

    15. Re:Fine with me by westoncb · · Score: 1

      Appears to be the 'net's first smiley totem pole.

      --
      "...such is the excellence of your judgment that it was ever contrary to that of the people's..."
  6. Imagine the scene by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 5, Funny

    Judge: Oleg Teterin?
    Oleg Teterin: Yes? :-)
    Judge: We have ruled that you don't have a patent on the emoticon
    Oleg Teterin: Oh :-(
    Everyone else: lol! :-P

    1. Re:Imagine the scene by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Oleg Teterin: Oh :-(
      Judge: You don't have a patent on that emoticon either
      Oleg Teterin: ...
      Lawyer: *flicks through looking for a patent on ellipses*

    2. Re:Imagine the scene by danieltdp · · Score: 1

      You would prefer if Everyone else did ;-) instead of :-P

      --
      -- dnl
  7. Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by MindKata · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "What lame-brain dummy would think that either :-( or ;-) are trademarkable symbols"

    The kind of person who would think of trademarking these symbols, would be a businessman who wanted to use this cheap stunt, to get a lot of publicity for his business. Its not about the trademark. Its a stunt, to generate free publicity for his business.

    --
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
    1. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by EdZ · · Score: 4, Funny

      Are you sure you're, using commas correctly?

    2. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by ideonode · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're not commas but apostrophes that fell of the "it's" and wandered upstream like salmon.

    3. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by danieltdp · · Score: 1

      So here is a new (?) emoticon: :,-( It's me crying because I can't blink anymore

      --
      -- dnl
    4. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by rastilin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is a saying that there's no such thing as bad publicity. This is wrong. Just ask Michael Jackson or OJ Simpson.

      --
      How do you kill that which has no life?
    5. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      They're probably stalking the missing 'f' from your post. ;)

    6. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps, he, talks, like, William, Shatner, you, insenesitive, clod?

    7. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      both have groupies. and got laid, at least once, probably more.

    8. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking OJ doesn't care much, one way or another, about publicity any more.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    9. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By small children in the former's case.

    10. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tack "Captain's log, stardate 1234, " onto the front of his post and it flows much more naturally.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    11. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Vornzog · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Maybe he's, William Shatner?

      --

      -V-

      Who can decide a priori? Nobody.
      -Sartre

    12. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Those were supposed to be ";-)" but he couldn't afford the licensing fee for anything except the ","

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    13. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by DarthJohn · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that apostrophes migrate?

    14. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its possible.




      '

    15. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wait - repeat that again I didn't get it...

    16. Re:Its a PR Stunt, not about trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It could be carried.

  8. This trademark is already invalidated by Cyberax · · Score: 4, Informative

    Rospatent has already invalidated this trademark because it's a generic image and doesn't offer Superfone any brand recognition.

  9. Patent THIS: by AndGodSed · · Score: 5, Funny

    :-*

    my

    (_|_)

    >:-(

    1. Re:Patent THIS: by theaveng · · Score: 1

      :-* ----- "Kiss"

      my ----- "my"

      (_|_) ----- "overweight American ass"

      >:-( ----- Okay now I'm stuck. What does this emoticon mean?

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    2. Re:Patent THIS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Angry face

    3. Re:Patent THIS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (_|_) ----- "overweight American ass"

      You... COMMUNIST! Oh, that was so 1950's.

    4. Re:Patent THIS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (@) --- Just got reamed

      -or-

      (*) -- Got reamed 24 hours ago

    5. Re:Patent THIS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >:-( --- I hope somebody shoots an arrow between your eyes.

    6. Re:Patent THIS: by AndGodSed · · Score: 1

      >:-( is a smiley flipping the bird. I could not fit an arm and the other fingers in there.

    7. Re:Patent THIS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (=@=)

      Goatse emoticon. Works better with the uppercase Greek letter Xi (U-039E) but the lameness filter won't allow it :'(

  10. Couldn't the folks who patented the typewriter... by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

    Couldn't the typewriter folks turn around and sue these Russians for stealing company secrets? It is a big secret right? Right?

  11. Previous art by Thanshin · · Score: 1

    Does that mean I won't be able to patent my new processus of using the character "" as pictographic symbol meaning "nose"?

  12. "Entrepreneur"? by NorQue · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why not call him the fraud that he is?

    1. Re:"Entrepreneur"? by Sockatume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He owns an advertising company. Whatever else he may be, entrepreneur fits as a label.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:"Entrepreneur"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One that sells mobile phone ads.

      COnsidering his willingness to commit trademark FRAUD, I think "entrepreneur" is indeed the wrong label.

    3. Re:"Entrepreneur"? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      1) In what legal or colloquial sense of "fraud", other than "bad thing", is this trademark fraud?

      2) In what sense does investing in mobile phone advertising not count as an entrepreneurial enterprise?

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  13. Is this copyright worldwide? by AndGodSed · · Score: 1, Funny

    Does this ruling apply worldwide?

    If so, I am now a emoticon pirate. You will probably be able to get some at piratebay soon.

    1. Re:Is this copyright worldwide? by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 1

      This is a Russian Ruling. It carries as much weight in the real world as the Russian claim on the Arctic.

    2. Re:Is this copyright worldwide? by JavaBasedOS · · Score: 1

      Dear AndGodSed,

      It is our duty to inform you that you have infringed on our clients' "frowny" trademark and therefore, you have been indicted.

      As of right now, the trial for the class-action suit is scheduled to take place on December 1st, 2008.

      We would also like to inform you that we have filed a patent for a time machine, so don't get any bright ideas, you jerk.

      Regards,
      The Smiley Industry Association of America

    3. Re:Is this copyright worldwide? by pentalive · · Score: 1

      P^] Arrgh!! We be Smiley Pirates!

    4. Re:Is this copyright worldwide? by TheAntiCrust · · Score: 1

      AGS! After all this time, I miss you!

    5. Re:Is this copyright worldwide? by AndGodSed · · Score: 1

      Crusty! Man! When I saw your reply in my mailbox I just HAD to check!

      How are you?

      The 'gab is back online btw...

      How's the Mazda? My car is in the shop, and I got invited to a training session for our local Porsche cup, gonna get a few laps around our local F1 track in a classic Porsche!

      Chat soon!

  14. Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just stupid! What's next, patenting keyboard buttons?

    Oh

    1. Re:Damn by Andr+T. · · Score: 2, Funny
      Here where I live we c_n't type a cert_in letter. You know, the first letter of the _lph_bet.

      D_mn, I'll be p_ying for my sig.

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    2. Re:Damn by ChrisMP1 · · Score: 1

      Here where I live we c_n't type a cert_in letter. You know, the first letter of the _lph_bet.
                                      ^

      Ya missed one. I'm calling the cops.

      P.S. ;-)

      --
      <sig>&nbsp;</sig>
    3. Re:Damn by mulvane · · Score: 1

      Here where I live we c_n't type a cert_in letter. You know, the first letter of the _lph_bet.

      D_mn, I'll be p_ying for my sig.

      Here where I live we c_n't type "[a] FAIL" cert_in letter. You know, the first letter of the _lph_bet.

      D_mn, I'll be p_ying for my sig.

    4. Re:Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here where I live we c_n't type a cert_in letter. You know, the first letter of the _lph_bet.

      D_mn, I'll be p_ying for my sig.

      Dear Sir,

      We at the Ariel 'a' Enterprises take great pride in the products and services we provide our customers under our trademark "a" symbol. In order to prevent confusion and dilute our name recognition, we must vigorously fight against the unlawful and inappropriate use of our symbol (the arial typeface, lower-case "a".) We spend upwards of 2bn USD each year to protect our valuable trademark.

      On Friday, December 12th, at 08:17AM, we noticed a post from you to slashdot containing the use of our trademarked symbol. As a result, we are sending this letter to inform you that you have illegally misappropriated our symbol, and are thus subject to legal proceedings. We'd like to fix this without involving the court system, and would like to offer you a license for the use of our symbol. Our license is non-exclusive, and offers a per-use fee of 20 USD for each use of our symbol (after paying a 1m USD "license setup fee.) If you are not interested in obtaining a license for the use, we'll see you in court.

      Respectfully,

      IMA LUZER
      Chief Council, Ariel "a" Enterprises.

    5. Re:Damn by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Here where I live we c_n't type a cert_in letter. You know, the first letter of the _lph_bet.

      What, spell bolour with a K? Why didn't I think of that? Silly bunt!

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    6. Re:Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      youreluckyherewecantusecapitalspunctuationorspaces

  15. Patent by loonycyborg · · Score: 5, Funny

    You keep using that "patent" word. I don't think that it means what you think it means.

    1. Re:Patent by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      s/patent/trademark. D'oh!

    2. Re:Patent by Zordak · · Score: 1

      Exactly. This guy got a trademark. Trademarks only cover confusingly-similar uses (at least in the U.S. and most other countries). That means that he can only restrict your use of the emoticon in cases where your use would confuse people into believing you're selling his product. The summary doesn't say what he's selling, but assume he's selling pens with smiley face on them. That means that if you sell smiley-face gasoline, you're okay. In other words, this is a non-issue.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    3. Re:Patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh!

    4. Re:Patent by Welshalian · · Score: 1

      You keep using that "patent" word. I don't think that it means what you think it means.

      It's trademarkly obvious they don't.

    5. Re:Patent by aldo.gs · · Score: 1

      Inconceivable!

  16. In Soviet Russia... by Cornwallis · · Score: 3, Funny

    :) owns all of us.

    1. Re:In Soviet Russia... by danieltdp · · Score: 1

      ;-) owns all of us

      There fixed for you

      --
      -- dnl
    2. Re:In Soviet Russia... by LordEd · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, ;-) owns you!

      At least use it correctly. The format is In Soviet Russia *noun* *verb* you!.

    3. Re:In Soviet Russia... by danieltdp · · Score: 1

      You should reply to GPs. I only quoted him ;-) (crap! trademark problems again!)

      --
      -- dnl
  17. Re:Couldn't the folks who patented the typewriter. by pm_rat_poison · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hello? Is this the patent office? Good. I'd like to file a patent please. It's called "Use of organic materials for human energy acquisition"

  18. In soviet russia C-: own you by Tei · · Score: 5, Funny

    Two counterfeigted version:
    C-:
    (-:

    --

    -Woof woof woof!

  19. leeches by Gearoid_Murphy · · Score: 1

    these people are parasites, not entrepreneurs.

    --
    prepare the survey weasels.
  20. Other Patent by Andr+T. · · Score: 4, Funny

    It seems he patented Times New Roman size 12pt too!

    --

    Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    1. Re:Other Patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That appears to be an error in the HTML. If you view the no where in it does it state anything about font.

    2. Re:Other Patent by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      Milk through the nose. Thanks

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  21. sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm :-( about the patent on :-)

  22. Easy fix by mlush · · Score: 1

    (-:

  23. Don't tell George Lucas by AnalPerfume · · Score: 1

    (-O-)
    >-O-

    1. Re:Don't tell George Lucas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't tell George Lucas what? That he's both the giver and the receiver?

  24. Time to opensource emoticons by frenchgates · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm tired of paying the man to use them and I don't have the programming skill to figure out how to make them myself.

    --
    Syntax error: loose != lose, affect != effect, then!=than
  25. Re:In soviet russia C-: own you by PinkyDead · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think you'll find that they are already defined as "User is cat in the dark with Mushroom on Head" and "User is ninja cat in the dark about to perform Sumarai attack", respectively.

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  26. Re:Copy-cats by Klaus_1250 · · Score: 1

    The worst part is, they aren't even original. No-one here heard of Despair Inc.? http://despair.com/frownies.html

    --
    It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
  27. There's No Such Agency... by MRe_nl · · Score: 4, Funny

    Anymore anyway.
    The name of the largest of the Russian successors to the KGB is the FSB, est. 1991.
    AKA the Federal Smiley Bureau ; ).

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    1. Re:There's No Such Agency... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Anymore anyway. The name of the largest of the Russian successors to the KGB is the FSB, est. 1991. AKA the Federal Smiley Bureau ; ).

      I always knew they were Fu***ng Stupid B***ards.

    2. Re:There's No Such Agency... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is just what the russians want you to believe...

    3. Re:There's No Such Agency... by sadgoblin · · Score: 1, Funny

      That's what they want you to think.

    4. Re:There's No Such Agency... by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 1

      As a humorus (and what I believe to be a true) sidenote, a swedish bank was very upset when the KGB did change it's name...

      Förenings Spar Banken lost so much business in Russia that they had to change their name to SwedBank. Apparently people did not trust the old KGB with their savings :-)

      --
      She made the willows dance
  28. Bender's Version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    :^(= =)
    my
    *[_|_]+

  29. This is Proof that by twmcneil · · Score: 2, Funny

    The Russians do have a sense of humor. It's just a little different than ours.

    --
    "The ferrets, they're every where I tell you!"
    1. Re:This is Proof that by BUL2294 · · Score: 1

      The Russians do have a sense of humor. It's just a little different than ours.

      DA!

      --
      Windows 3.1x calc: 3.11 - 3.10 = 0.00
  30. Where Have I Seen This Before? by wchatam · · Score: 2, Funny

    This reminds me of the shenanigans of a company closer to home. I'd like to invite these two to work out their emoticon patent issues in the following manner:

    o
    |\__o
    /\/\ /\

    1. Re:Where Have I Seen This Before? by QuadEddie · · Score: 0

      Let me guess... Would you could you with a goat?

  31. Re:Let me the first to say by mcgrew · · Score: 1, Informative

    It's not Soviet Russia any more. It's Post Soviet Russia.

    In Post Soviet Russia, mcgrew corrects YOU!

  32. How the hell??? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    Given that this has been in common usage in email and the like for a very long time (I've been using ;-) for at least 15 years now) how in the hell can this be trademarked??

    I realize patents have prior art, and we're talking about a Russian institution (from which I'm told you can likely buy anything) -- but how in the hell can a widely used emoticon which likely predates this guy using it in any way shape or form be trademarked??? Isn't this kinda like trademarking "the" or something??

    I'm sure he'll be able to extort a little money out of one of the big companies. But, really, this makes no sense whatsoever to me.

    Cheers

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:How the hell??? by porcupine8 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, who'd ever think you could trademark a common word?

      I'm so confused and amazed at the lack of understand of the difference between a patent, a copyright, and a trademark around these parts. Trademarking something does not mean that no one can ever use it again for any reason at all.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    2. Re:How the hell??? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      I'm so confused and amazed at the lack of understand of the difference between a patent, a copyright, and a trademark around these parts. Trademarking something does not mean that no one can ever use it again for any reason at all.

      Ah, but here's what I don't get: You can only trademark something for the specific area of business you engage in, and as an identifying mark for your business. And, TFS seems to indicate this trademark was granted by the parent office (which, I assume in Russia is one and the same) and he expects to license it for big cash.

      So, in exactly what area of business has he expressly gotten this as a trademark? Internet connections? IM? Document editors? Online forums? Cell phones? Graffiti?

      What companies in what specific area of business does this guy wants to charge a "license" to for this ridiculous "trademark"?? Because, I completely fail to see how any of the people he wants to make cough up will be competing with him in terms of his specific trademark? Unless someone is using it as part of a company name or slogan in his specific area of industry, it's essentially punctuation, and therefore irrelevant.

      Even the existence of "MS Word" does not preclude from me calling something a "word processor" as that was the industry term for such a product long before "Word" was a specific product. Microsoft can't restrict my use of the English language, merely to have a competing product called "Word". There are limitations on how broad a trademark can be applied, as you've pointed out. I'm just not convinced that as presented, this guy will satisfy any of them.

      In short, misconceptions and general lack of understanding of difference between patent and trademarks aside ... what is the merit of this guys claim to this and who can he force to license it from him??? Simply using this in the eay emoticons have been always used is not an infringement on his trade rights.

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:How the hell??? by porcupine8 · · Score: 1

      But the stupidity is in his expectation of cashing in on this, not in the trademark being issued, which is what people keep complaining about. It's probably just a publicity stunt, really.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    4. Re:How the hell??? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      But the stupidity is in his expectation of cashing in on this, not in the trademark being issued, which is what people keep complaining about.

      I just have no idea how you can bend the concept of trademark to even consider cashing in on this.

      These get used as punctuation, and unless you're specifically using it in a way that interferes with him using this as a trade mark (ie. an identifying brand for your company) I just can't see how he's thinking of making anyone else license this from him. It sounds like he's trying to conflate copyright and trademark into one here.

      If he's running a company as "Superfone ;-)" then maybe you could argue that "Happyfone ;-)" might infringe on this as a trademark. But, there's no other situation I can think of in which trademark applies here.

      It's probably just a publicity stunt, really.

      Entirely possible, but I've long since stopped giving the benefit of the doubt to such people. The world really is full of weasels hoping to cash in. :-P

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  33. Prior art - literally by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

    Emoticon nail decals :-) :-D :-X

    Useful when you want to take care which finger you raise to someone.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  34. So you own :-) well :-p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    now a Russian owns :-)? wha? :-0 I'm mad >:-[ you can't own :-) as much as anyone can own a common word! Utter nonsense. I'm sure there's prior art >:-p

  35. Lame-braine ddummy by phorm · · Score: 1

    What lame-brain dummy would think that either :-( or ;-) are trademarkable symbols

    Actually, I think that the lame-brain in this case is not the "businessman" (although extortionist might be a better term), but the idiot who actually granted the application...

  36. Greedy dickhead by PincusJr · · Score: 0

    Wow, what a dickhead!

  37. Emoticons are funnier by snspdaarf · · Score: 3, Funny

    in the original Klingon.

    --
    Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
  38. :) does it... by duffy27 · · Score: 1

    does it count if you don't use the nose? :)

  39. In response, I reserve the use of :-P by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    As well as the acronym "STFU" and the expletive "retard".

  40. History repeating all over again by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    The name Cingular ring a bell? They didn't succeed either.

  41. Maybe this will stifle use and kill the format by riegel · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe this will stifle their use and kill the format.

    Maybe this is a good use of the patent system.

    I also think any web forum that uses them should pay through the nose to this guy for the revenues he has surely lost.

    This will have the greater effect of stifling all such uses in the future.

    The more I think about it the more convinced I am that this is an excellent use of the patent system.

    ;) , Ooops I mean *wink*.

    --
    http://p8ste.com - Web based Clipboard
  42. Slashdot == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are trademarks on *words* you dumbass.

    For instance, Ford has a UK trademark on the word "Fiesta". That doesn't mean I can't talk about a fiesta I attended over the weekend. Trademarks apply to specific industries only. Ford's trademark means that you'll never see a Volkswagen Fiesta, not that people can no longer use the word "fiesta" in emails. No different for ;-).

    The concept of "public domain" has nothing to do with trademarks. That's a term from copyright law.

    Overall, I suggest the people working in the Russian patent office have a slightly firmer grasp on the legalities of this than you do.

    If you understood the concept of trademarks whatsoever you'd realize that trademarking ;-), even if successful, would not prevent people from using it in emails.

    But I suspect this whole thing is what us cynics refer to as a "publicity stunt".

    1. Re:Slashdot == Zoo filled with Idiots? by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1

      For instance, Ford has a UK trademark on the word "Fiesta".

      Only in relation to cars, not wank mags. Similarly, for Escort.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
  43. Morons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They're called smileys you dumbasses.

  44. In other news, by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 2, Funny

    I have now copyrighted the word 'fuck', and would like to offer it's use to the world for the low, low price of $0.05 USD. Users may buy a volume license of 30 uses for a dollar. Sysadmins may obtain an unlimited license for $20/year.

    --
    I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    1. Re:In other news, by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      I have now copyrighted the word 'fuck', and would like to offer it's use to the world for the low, low price of $0.05 USD. Users may buy a volume license of 30 uses for a dollar. Sysadmins may obtain an unlimited license for $20/year.

      Fuck! That's fucking fucked, you fucking fucker. How the fuck do you think you can claim any fucking copyright on the use of word fuck?

      No $0.40 for you. :-)

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:In other news, by daggit · · Score: 1

      You'll backrupt Rod Blagojevich.

  45. how to circumvent the trademark by koutbo6 · · Score: 1

    (-:
    ):
    (8

    --
    You speak London? I speak London very best.
    1. Re:how to circumvent the trademark by koutbo6 · · Score: 1

      Before anyone makes a move .. I would like to mention that these are released under the terms of the GPL V3.0

      --
      You speak London? I speak London very best.
  46. I should patent ==, !=, etc. by Doug52392 · · Score: 1

    Why don't I patent all of the logical operators used on most modern programming languages, including ==, !=, &&, ||, etc. Gee, I could sue EVERY major software company, even Microsoft, for infringing my copyrights! I could be R$CH!

    1. Re:I should patent ==, !=, etc. by hawaiian717 · · Score: 1

      And suddenly, AppleScript gains popularity.

      --
      End of Line.
  47. inb4 patenting cellular respiration. by Doug52392 · · Score: 1

    We'd all be screwed if someone patented "A system and method of natural cellular respiration to sustain life", or the equation... They could collect money from every living orginism on Earth every time an orginism breaths!

    There are (somewhat) restrictions on patents relating to biological entities and processes, but they found a legal loophole before (All those patents on our DNA)...

  48. I'm afraid you ALL owe me ton of money... by HexaByte · · Score: 0, Redundant
    You see, I've just found an idiot in the Trademark Office that let me trademark a,e,i,o,u, and y when used to represent a vowel sound.

    So, unless you all want to get sued, you need to send me 2 cents (US) for each 1 thousand vowels used.

    It's not too expensive, and if you are a book or newspaper publisher, I offer volume discounts!

    --
    HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
  49. Prisons happier places... by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 4, Funny

    I am I the ONLY one that see this as a "good" thing?

    I mean, if you ban emoticons then only crminals will have emoticons.

    Think how much cherrier prisons would be!! :-)


    hmmm... or more dangerous...

    ...._______________________
    ..../_==o;;;;;;____________[]
    ''' ), ---.(_(__) /
    '' // (__) ), -"
    ' //__//
    //__//

  50. Who gives a flying f**k anyway? by quadrofolio · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who the hell cares. As if Russians give a damn about western laws. Same goes the other way round. What a lame sod he is. Good luck enforcing your lame copyright dude. :-) Wanker

  51. Re:Copy-cats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should RTFS:

    "Teterin may have gotten the idea by catching up on some old news about Despair, Inc., which in May 2000 was awarded a US trademark on the "frowny" emoticon (Slashdot story). "

  52. Despair.com should sue him by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    It's too close to their trademark on ":-("(tm)

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  53. Not so fast by Futile+Rhetoric · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The rademark institution said that the smiley is an integral part of the "Superfone" logo, is not a trademark in and of itself, and is in fact incapable of being one.

    Sorry to ruin everybody's party, but here is a source for those who can read Russian or are awesome enough for Babelfish.

    1. Re:Not so fast by Futile+Rhetoric · · Score: 1

      ...that was supposed to be "trademark". It's obvious, of course, but my pedantry wouldn't let it slide.

  54. Copy cats, but different by Quila · · Score: 1

    Despair has a trademark to use it in its specific business. Nobody's affected unless they try to use it in similar commerce in a similar manner.

  55. Proof by BCW2 · · Score: 1

    Some people are born stupid, others work at it, and some do both!

    --
    Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  56. Letters andyone ? by Spc01 · · Score: 1

    Maybe we should trademark letters. So everyone that has written a letter in their lifetime should be punished and put to jail.

  57. Teterin didn't come up with these -- Fahlman did by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  58. He's really more of an (_|_) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Whatever else he may be, entrepreneur fits as a label.

    Perhaps. But to me, he'll be an "asshole" first and foremost. Or to put it in terms he might understand, he's an (_|_)

  59. Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... if Microsoft can trademark the XP emoticon.

  60. The supposed use is wrong by jgoemat · · Score: 2, Informative

    Trademarks apply to branding products. If your use wouldn't cause brand confusion with his advertising company, 'Suprafone', then you wouldn't be infringing on the trademark anyway.

  61. Are you pimping us out ? by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    In one or another weird sense you are telling me you are pimping us all out here !

    oh, sorry, I forgot, this is slashdot, no money to earn here ! :)

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  62. A good use for nuclear weapons by dsmall · · Score: 1

    Someone tries to grab the smiley face?

    I say, it's time a missile test up in Minot.

    We need to target this guy, and their patent office.

    I would think that 350 kt should be sufficient to stop this nonsense.

      -- grin,

    David

  63. we are talking about ;-) by krischik · · Score: 1

    No - after all you missed the wick. It's the one with the semicolon which is patented ;-)

  64. No! It's ;-) by krischik · · Score: 1

    You missed the wick. It's the one with the semicolon which is patented ;-)

  65. Provocation would work better with the right smily by krischik · · Score: 1

    which would be ;-) - note the semicolon.

  66. Yay for more ridiculous trademark/patent stories. by TOGSolid · · Score: 1

    To: Oleg Teterin
    :-]
    What now bitch?

    While I know that trademarks and patents and all those shiny things have a purpose, it's just getting stupid these days with what people will try and make a claim for. This still doesn't top McDonald's patenting how to make a burger though.
    At least the Russian courts aren't so blitheringly dense that they'd allow this.

  67. in soviet russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well, well:

    In Soviet Russia, you own smiley...

    Who would have thunk it?

  68. Emoticons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck the crooked Ruskies!

  69. Smile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All your ;-) are belong to us!