Genie I just saw an article about a lawsuit, some nongame app developer sue a game dev for using the same name for his game. Thats actually crazy if you have to check the whole categorie software for not using similar names.

Names are protectable under trademark law, but only for things within a specific domain. Games are software technically, but I would certainly expect that games as an entertainment product would be in a different domain from say enterprise software, which would fall either in productivity or well, enterprise category of some kind.

packrat I think you're often given a chance to rebrand before charges are pressed if you can prove the infringement was an accident.

In particular if you go to register a trademark with the name, the office should be able to inform you that there's already a trademark for the particular name and what type of entity or product it applies to.

        packrat
        Im not sure if you cant be sued for compensation, if proven to be the reason for financial lost, which is often attempted.

        Also if you invest in marketing in that particular game name and may be build the concept around it, that could be a financial pit to switch the name.

        Megalomaniak In particular if you go to register a trademark with the name, the office should be able to inform you that there's already a trademark for the particular name and what type of entity or product it applies to.

        That is not the case, if you about to register a mark in the EU, they have a disclaimer that they dont check if this name is already been taken, that's why there is plenty of campanies, focus on that topic.

              These days finding a good name is very hard. I've registered I few names and marks.

              packrat When I got into a conflict, what happened was that we started to negotiate. They, of course tried to get me to back out 100%. But I stood my ground and tweaked the fields I wanted the marks and name for. They still tried to scare me, but when we put them against the wall and demanded proof in their claims, they had no choice but to back off, and we won the fight (but we had to sacrifice the range of fields and narrow it down to the specifics). And this was against a huge international enterprise.

              Genie That is not the case, if you about to register a mark in the EU, they have a disclaimer that they dont check if this name is already been taken, that's why there is plenty of campanies, focus on that topic.

              In my experience, the firm I used did a shallow check, but not much more than that. Hunting down trademarks globally can be very expensive, as well as not giving you any guarantees.

              Big companies will fight hard to scare the little guys away. And I would say, when someone approaches you with claims, 1. Check to see if their trademarks is within your domain 2. Make them show proof they are within their rights.

              packrat personally i'd just keep a list of reasonable names and roll with your favorite until someone gets pissed, then go to your second favorite.

              This I very much agree with.

                    Genie That is not the case,

                    Notice how I said "should be able to" and not "they will".

                      6 months later

                      Do you even need to register trademark? I mean if you buy a domain like y.com and then create game with the name y. and you publish the game as yourself (person). Doesnt it mean that you own the name? I mean you published it right? And you have bought the domain.

                      I understand that the trademark holder doesnt have to buy domains etc.. etc..

                      Maybe its safer to register trademark before you publish, but then what advantage does it give?

                      For example in small 1dev team, what good does it do to your game?

                      Yes you can say "i own it" but you already do 😃

                        kuligs2 It's more of a convenience and gives stronger protection, but so long as you can sufficiently prove that you used a certain name first then you should be good. Given of course that in terms of a court case you can afford the legal fees to see it to the end.

                          i dont get why you have to pay legal fees, if you are wrongfully accused...

                            kuligs2 i dont get why you have to pay legal fees, if you are wrongfully accused...

                            That's like saying you shouldn't have to pay for food, if you are hungry.

                            Lawyers usually want to be paid for their time and expenses. Court systems have expenses. Someone has to pay them.

                            You could sue someone for wrongfully accusing you. After months or years and more legal fees, you may (or may not) get your money back.

                                DaveTheCoder "may" get your money back.. i dont want to go off a tangent here, but TLDR, courts are not private enterprise, they get paid from taxes that "regulars" pay. Also you dont need a lawyer to represent. Thats why there is court to look at the evidence and use the court of law.. im no scientist but thats how i imagine it to be. Also bums dont have to work to get food, they just beg.. You could argue that begging is a form of work but its not a real work, its just a "leech work" that you leech off of someone else.

                                    kuligs2 If you win the case you can request for compensation of your legal fees. As for the fees, you pay your legal advisory, that is the lawyer. Not the court. Nowadays there's ChatGPT, back in the day however unless you were a lawyer yourself, going without one was probably not a good idea.

                                      I wonder if you could actually use ChatGPT in a courtroom to argue a case. It would be like having an anonymous lawyer on the phone telling you how to respond to what the judge or opposing attorney say.

                                      I suspect that the judge would not allow that.

                                      Of course you could use ChatGPT to prepare for a case, just as you could consult with a lawyer or do your own legal research.

                                        DaveTheCoder I wonder if you could actually use ChatGPT in a courtroom to argue a case. It would be like having an anonymous lawyer on the phone telling you how to respond to what the judge or opposing attorney say.

                                        Something like that, though I was thinking more like how law students are using it. To ask questions about specific laws and aspects of them. You'd still be acting as your own defense. I guess that's not too different from how you put it tho.