Slashdot Mirror
Nexus One Name Irks Philip K. Dick's Estate
RevWaldo writes "According to the Wall Street Journal, the estate of Philip K. Dick says the name of Google's new smartphone infringes on the famous character name from Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?. Isa Dick Hackett, a daughter of Mr. Dick, states Google has its 'Android system, and now they are naming a phone "Nexus One." It's not lost on the people who are somewhat familiar with this novel... Our legal team is dealing head-on with this.'"
Give me free money!
The same name can be held as a trademark by different entities if the usages don't conflict.
I see no problem here.
Yes, the headline should read - Google rips off Dick.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Longest first post evar?!
You type fast. Very fast. Too fast, perhaps. That makes me suspicious.
Can you look into this Voight-Kampff machine, please, and tell me only the good things about your mother?
The flame that burns +1, Funny burns -1, Long.
And you have burned so very, very +1, Funny Bottles.
It's still a homage. Not having a trademark on the name of a consumer electronics device is just plain stupid, business-wise. I don't think that sales of the book will be harmed by this, nor do I expect that there will be any confusion over which is which. In a good society with good laws there's no way the Dick estate would be able to get a dime or force any change based on this. Nobody asks for permission from Karel apek or his estate before calling something a robot, even though it's a clear reference, and I don't see why this should be any different.
The case of Droid is very different in that there really was an existing trademark and, though it would likely be legal use the name in another field, it's always (legally) safer to get permission.
I want my Cowboyneal
It's a freaking WORD. It comes from the DICTIONARY.
This has gone way too far, in two ways. One, we are not talking about a book, we are talking about a WORD. Two, Philip's heirs should not earn ongoing profits from work done by Philip a generation ago. Has their income incentivized them to produce anything noteworthy themselves? I think not; in direct contradiction to the whole point of congress's authority to assign limited monopolies.
Google should do two things. The should fight this in the courts, but much more importantly, they should use their considerable resources and clout to lobby congress to update the legal framework such that it encourages, rather than hinders, innovation in the sciences and the useful arts. Congress, elected by the people, has the last word on this one.
Yep, here is a fine example of it
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Philip Dick has been dead for more than 20 years, time for his family to stop parasitizing on his success.
Given that he has been dead for 28 years, his works should be in the public domain. Then there would be no dispute.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
I'm now copyrighting NEXUS TWO, NEXUS THREE and NEXUS FOUR by using these in my post.
When Google brings out next generations of its phone, I'll sue them and become rich!
You gotta think ahead.
"we've got trenchcoats and bad attitudes" - John Constantine, HellBlazer
It depends on what they registered the trademark for. You don't register a trademark and then it's good for everything. You have to select usages and the more you pick the more it costs.
Philip K Dick did not invent the term Android or even Nexus. The name Nexus One may be a nod towards Nexus 6 but they aren't the same and one is for a mobile phone and one is a fictional character.
I don't side with them because for starters its not the creator that's complaining. It's his lecherous kids who are just being greedy. They see the Android platform taking off, they're used to getting money for doing nothing (thanks to daddy) so they think they're owed a piece of Google's business.
The people on whom the connection is not lost, would see this as a tribute from Google to Philip K. Dick. It would be sad if this sort of unbridled greed on the part of some discourages companies and people from expressing their admiration for the contributions of others.
I do not have a problem with an author's children trying to assert their legal rights --- but this would've been as wrong if the author himself had talked about suing. There is really no reason, legal or otherwise, for Google to be paying money to the Dick foundation. Trademark laws do not apply here. And, does anyone think the name is going to "help" Nexus / Android sales ? Or that there will be people who will buy the nexus thinking it is a Dick novel ? Is Google really profiting or abusing Dick's IP ? Are book sales going to be affected ?
It's a real product by Rösch Company: Linux. Micro&Soft For some reason, I would call toilet paper "Micro&Soft" :-P
"Hey you should really read this book" "Nah I'm waiting for the phone to come out"
Even Motorola had the wherewithal to kindly ask Lucas before using Droid as a name for their phone because 'droid' is a registered trademark of Lucasfilm Ltd.
The clue is in the part of your own post starting "because" - even then, its debatable as to whether that trademark would apply to anything other than plush R2D2 toys.
Google applied for a trademark on "NEXUS ONE" [uspto.gov].
Yup - "Nexus 1". Not "Nexus 6". Its a dictionary word and a number. I Googled for "Nexus" and get the Tyne and Wear public transportation system, a Christian music school, a dating agency, a production company and a sponsored link to Amazon leading to a whole bunch of rather pornographic looking novels. No Dick (at least of the Philip K variety).
Now, if Google had jumped straight to "Nexus 6", launched an ad campaign featuring Rutger Hauer, and offered a free lead codpiece or a $100 mail-in rebate on a genuine goat, there might have been a case.
(Push your eyeballs out through your ears? There's an App for that!)
Where do you suppose it should stop? Should Red Hat need Paramount's permission for "Red Hat Enterprise Linux" - or Nokia for the "Nokia Communicator"? Is "Heroes" ripping off Neal Stevenson by having a character punnily named "Hiro"?
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
If this goes to court, Google would better win, or else we'll be treated to a headline "Google pays Dick wads".
Bunch of god damn parasites. PKD is DEAD. In my view that leaves his work should be public domain. Is that the law? No, the law presently favours the leeches, the parasites, the lawyers. I'm no big fan of Google as a company, but I say "go for it, Google". Fuck these people. PKD is dead. None of the people involved had anything to do with his writing or work or creativity. They are leeches existing at the pig trough of Imaginary Property rights. In a more just society they would be burned as devils.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
But a novels and phones are entirely different product categories. Therefore, no confusion is possible, and the novel and the phone can co-exist even if both are trademarks.
Furthermore, Nexus One and Nexus-6 are distinct. You don't get the trademark for one just because you have the trademark for the other.