Sony sees five trademarks abandoned (including Bloodborne) in the US

R

Rösti

Unconfirmed Member
#1
Yesterday, on March 23, 2015, Sony Computer Entertainment America saw five of its trademark applications abandoned, likely because of administrative error (same situation as with the trademark for The Last Guardian in February), in the US. Four of these trademark applications concern computer game software, the remaining concerns headphones.

The affected trademarks are (source via links):


Reason for abandonment:

Abandoned because no Statement of Use or Extension Request timely filed after Notice of Allowance was issued. To view all documents in this file, click on the Trademark Document Retrieval link at the top of this page.
The attorney who handled these applications was Kiphanie Radford who is no longer with Sony. She also handled the application for The Last Guardian which was abdoned on February 16 this year. Since then, Lindsey Anne Mohle (RIHC, The State Bar of California) together with Anthony Justman (Senior Director, Legal & Business Affairs at Sony) handle most trademark cases. If these trademarks have indeed been abandoned due to administrative error, I find it a bit strange. It's been after all more than a month since the The Last Guardian incident, I would have thought someone would have checked if other trademark applications were in jeapordy of being abandoned. Seemingly nobody bothered to do so.

As for the games connected to these applications, there should be no problems, especially Bloodborne ought to see no holdback as it launches today (March 24) in North America. These issues ought to be resolved shortly. One could consider this rather sloppy practice however if indeed abandonment is due to an administrative error on Sony's part.
 
#2
That first game is a really good 'match 3 game' ala Pokemon Shuffle...and for $10 you can get rid of the stamina bar~
If you got a Vita and like match 3 games, def. give it a try.

Though curious, I thought that game was owned by Acquire, or am I confusing how trademarks affect the content itself?
 
#11
The excel sheet that reminded the trademark expiration dates was accidentally deleted, but no sensitive user data was compromised.

Edit: We should have a kickstarter that pools some funds so we can grab an actually live trademark the next accidental trademark blunder Sony has. LawyerGAF, is this actually profitable?
 
#13
So, what would happen if some random nobody bought the TM and sued SONY for using the name Bloodborne ? Would it work? I guess not but I am interested if there is any way somebody could abuse this.
 
#14
Does this mean anything? I thought the registration of a trademark was just a formality. The important bit was being able to show that you created and continued to use a given trademark,
 
#15
So, what would happen if some random nobody bought the TM and sued SONY for using the name Bloodborne ? Would it work? I guess not but I am interested if there is any way somebody could abuse this.
I think there is a period of time after an TM is abandoned that the owners can reclaim it. No one can just jump in and snatch the Bloodborne TM up until some time has passed.
 
#16
I think someone might get fired for this one.

So, what would happen if some random nobody bought the TM and sued SONY for using the name Bloodborne ? Would it work? I guess not but I am interested if there is any way somebody could abuse this.
Sony has prior usage of it.
 
#22
Does this mean anything? I thought the registration of a trademark was just a formality. The important bit was being able to show that you created and continued to use a given trademark,
THAT.

There's a legal precedent for use and continued use. Earliest use isn't as important as continued and monetized use of a trademark over a certain amount of time.
 
#28
That first game is a really good 'match 3 game' ala Pokemon Shuffle...and for $10 you can get rid of the stamina bar~
If you got a Vita and like match 3 games, def. give it a try.

Though curious, I thought that game was owned by Acquire, or am I confusing how trademarks affect the content itself?
According to gamefaqs, the game is developed and published by SCEI Japan.
The previous game in the franchise "Holy Invasion of Privacy, Badman! What Did I Do To Deserve This?" (real name) was developed by Acquire.
 
#36
According to gamefaqs, the game is developed and published by SCEI Japan.
The previous game in the franchise "Holy Invasion of Privacy, Badman! What Did I Do To Deserve This?" (real name) was developed by Acquire.
That might just be the most absurd game title I've heard in a long time. Well done to whoever penned that gem.
 
#41
BRB, gonna snatch that Bloodborne trademark.
Buy Bloodborne and sell it back to them for big monies.
GAF should buy that Bloodbourne TM and split the profits :D
So, what would happen if some random nobody bought the TM and sued SONY for using the name Bloodborne ? Would it work? I guess not but I am interested if there is any way somebody could abuse this.
does anyone know how much the TM costs? ^^
Trademarks aren't like domain names where when someone doesn't renew it someone else can swoop in a buy it up.

Maybe From made a deal for Bloodborne TM and Bloodborne 2 turns out multiplatform.
registering a trademark is not the same as owning the IP. If sony owns the IP (I don't know if they do) then they decide what platform it, and any sequels, is on.

Proves that TM abandonments mean quite nothing.
Yup!
 
#42
If my memory from business law class is not mistaken, you can have own a trademark without registering it, right? Registering it just lets you enforce it more easily?
 
#48
I'm an IP attorney by profession. I don't understand how Sony's lawyers keep allowing this to happen. Hell, its grounds for a misconduct violation for an attorney to allow this to happen (if its actually the attorney's fault and not some other Sony clerical error). Hire me Sony, I'll get this in order haha.
 
#49
So I can't just put a "Bloodborne 2" sticker on copies of Nightmare Creatures and go to town?

In all seriousness, I do think this is kind of lame of whomever is supposed to be in charge of this over at the Sony camp. Not a big deal, but a sign that maybe priorities need to be re-aligned and the schedule re-examined.
 
#50
Beyond creating a bit of a bureaucratic headache this doesn't mean much.

That said, missing these sorts of obvious deadlines is pretty much the basest example of poor lawyering.