Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

John McAfee Sues Intel To Use His Own Name (bloomberg.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the naming-names dept.

Long-time Slashdot reader AmiMoJo quotes a report from Bloomberg: John McAfee, the creator of the eponymous antivirus computer software system, sued Intel Corp. for the right to use his name in new ventures after the chip maker bought his former company. Intel bought McAfee in 2010 and eventually renamed it "Intel Security." McAfee has since joined digital gaming company MGT Capital Investments Inc. as chairman and chief executive, with plans to rename the company "John McAfee Global Technologies Inc."

McAfee says Intel warned him that any use of his name will infringe on the company's trademarks that it acquired with the McAfee deal in 2010, according to his complaint filed Friday in Manhattan federal court.
Intel hopes to sell their antivirus unit for $3 billion, according to the article -- after acquiring it in 2011 for $7.7 billion.

18 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. Whaaaaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Cry me a river. He sold his name out, now he has to live with the consequences.

  2. When John McAfee is president by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    We're going to build a wall around Silicon Valley and make them pay for it. When the big earthquake comes, they and their $5000/month studio apartments can all crumble into the sea.

  3. Should sue them for what Intel did to his name by geek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Intel has fucked that division sideways. I just had a meeting with the intel security team, including their CTO and they are totally out of ideas and out of their depths. They have no vision for how to compete with the new companies nipping at their heels and are at least 5 years away from a viable product for the enterprise that isn't signature based.

    Anyone that buys McAfee for 3.3 billion is out of their freaking minds.

  4. Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Change your name to John Intelsucks, you'll soon get your rights back.

  5. He can buy it back ... by perpenso · · Score: 2

    Cry me a river. He sold his name out, now he has to live with the consequences.

    Exactly. He chose his name as a "brand", he trademarked that name/brand, he sold that name/brand. He received large sums of money so others could exclusively use that name/brand.

    If he wants that name/brand he can buy it, just like the people he sold it to.

    1. Re:He can buy it back ... by Calydor · · Score: 2

      But the thing is he didn't have to change his name when he sold the brand.

      Should we only ever get one chance to use our real names as a brand?

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:He can buy it back ... by perpenso · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the thing is he didn't have to change his name when he sold the brand.

      A trademark is specific to a particular category, the exclusivity only applies to the specifically stated category. For example he is free to start McAfee Pharmaceuticals Inc but not McAfee Software Development Inc. Similarly names are outside of the stated category.

      Should we only ever get one chance to use our real names as a brand?

      You are not limited to one chance unless you voluntarily SELL a brand based on your name, and again its category specific. He could have sold the technology, the software/data/patents/etc, while retaining the company/brand name. But he would have received less money. He CHOSE to go for a bigger payday by letting the name/brand go.

    3. Re:He can buy it back ... by stephanruby · · Score: 2

      Exactly. He chose his name as a "brand", he trademarked that name/brand, he sold that name/brand. He received large sums of money so others could exclusively use that name/brand. If he wants that name/brand he can buy it, just like the people he sold it to.

      Actually, he may have a case.

      Intel did rename MacAffee Security to Intel Security.

      The phrase "use it or lose it," while cliché, aptly describes the underlying principles for obtaining and maintaining trademark rights in the United States.
      Use, not registration, matters most in the United States.
      See article.

      And it's not like Intel doesn't have lawyers on staff.

    4. Re:He can buy it back ... by radarskiy · · Score: 2

      The business unit was re-branded, since it now does more than create McAfee products. However, the McAfee products are still branded McAfee.

    5. Re:He can buy it back ... by mysidia · · Score: 2

      . He received large sums of money so others could exclusively use that name/brand.

      And that Name/Brand is McAfee Antivirus, not John McAfee, and definitely not "John McAfee Global Technologies" .

      In fact.... I know another person named McAfee, who has a son named John, so this John doesn't have exclusive use of even 'John McAfee', either.
      There are other people on earth with this name. And it's a common custom / tradition to name projects or small businesses / ventures after yourself.

      Just because you named a company so its name includes your name does not mean that selling your company transfers rights to your personal name.
      Only issue would be if the new company were going to be a security software maker and sell a security product with a confusingly-similar name on the product or point of retail.

  6. He might want to rethink this by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Given what he's been doing over the past couple of decades, and given for what he was in the news a few years ago - a lot of people hear "John McAfee" and think of something other than software.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  7. Good luck with that. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This happened with Walter S. Taylor and his (now) Bully Hill Vineyard. His grandfather started the Taylor Wine Company in New York. Walter joined the company as Exec VP and was disturbed by various legal practices (below):

    Walter became growingly concerned with the direction Taylor was taking under the protection of New York law—protection that let wineries deceptively make their wine under a veil of secrecy. Wineries could add dozens of chemicals, concentrates, water, and “foreign” juice to their wines without informing the consumer on the label. Deep in the middle of the night, under a veil of secrecy, wineries would receive deliveries of juice from California in “Tank Cars” to add to their wines. They could even still call their bottle of wine a New York wine!

    He spoke out, was eventually fired and started Bully Hill Vineyards. In 1977, Taylor Wine was bought out by Coca-Cola and they filed an injunction preventing Walter from using the name "Taylor" on any of his products or making any implications that he / Bully Hill was ever associated with Taylor Wine.

    When I visited the winery in the 1980s, all the labels said "Walter S. [blacked out]" and featured a picture of the company mascot - a goat. Underneath it said, "They got my name, but they didn't get my goat."

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Good luck with that. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

      After looking at John McAfee ... perhaps he can follow a similar path as Walter S. Taylor.

      A picture of his face and underneath it says: John D. [blacked out] -- They got my name, but they didn't get my goatee.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  8. Re:Trademarks are about brand confusion not owners by Shimbo · · Score: 2

    Apple is also a great example. Apple records and Apple computer. Until Apple started selling music nobody would have confused the two.

    Actually Apple is a very poor example, because Apple Corps and Apple Inc. have a long history of trademark litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  9. Re: So he's a libertarian by DaHat · · Score: 2

    I'm not privy to the specifics of the contract, are you?

    All I see here and in TFA is that Intel said McAfee can't use his own name in a company name, not that he sold full rights to his name when he left the company.

    For all we know he is going to court to get a declaratory ruling as to if he is able to do so or not, rather than change his new company name to what he wants and deal with a more expensive Intel suit.

    --
    Help Brendan pay off his student loans
  10. Re:Lookin' for a job in the city.. by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

    What does this trademark lawsuit have to do with a copyright lawsuit?

  11. Re:Asshole by ArtemaOne · · Score: 2

    The Trademark has been unused for years, giving him grounds for forced negotiation at the very least.

  12. Same thing with Ransom Eli Olds by knorthern+knight · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ransom Eli Olds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... founded Olds Motor Vehicle Company, later renamed Olds Motor Works. The company was bought out by GM in 1908. When Mr. Olds got back into the automotive business, he obviously couldn't use the "Olds" name for his product, which might cause confusion with GM's "Oldsmobile".

    He use an acronym based on his initials for the truck company he set up. The product was called the "REO Speed Wagon" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user