| Category: General
Oh boy. This never turns out well.
Like the time Wizards of the Coast claimed to own the word “Ranger”, and both the Tolkien estate and the US Army dropped their monocles at the audacity.
And possibly also Chuck Norris.
R© You Serious?!
Nothing like advertising to the world that your company no longer has any meaningful go-forward revenue opportunities.
Maybe if they had gone for some creative names they wouldn’t believe everyone is out to get them. Also, the letter R belong to Rare, if it belong to any gaming company.
Is Gene Simmons a stakeholder by any chance?
Oh no! My Sesame Street!
Boy Take Two really trying to Dethrone EA and Activision as biggest piece of shit publisher
There are a shitload of pirates who would disagree. Arrrrrrr!!!!
good luck with that, there’s a programming language also called R
Mmm see you in court, I’ve owned the letter “R” for years now.
It’s pretty clear that this article is written by someone without any meaningful background in intellectual property law whatsoever.
> It seems the company is trying to protect these properties, but in doing so is trying to trademark basic words such as ‘Rockstar’ and ‘Bully’.
> words such as Bully and Rockstar existed way before Take-Two even formed, and so the desire on their part to own such words is somewhat concerning.
That’s how trademarking *works.* [Microsoft has the mark “Halo” registered,](https://trademarks.justia.com/875/92/halo-87592606.html) and obviously the word “halo” was around for quite some time before the games were developed. When you trademark something, you only “own” it in the specific context(s) under which it was registered.
Take-Two claiming that they own the “Bully” mark doesn’t mean that they own the word. It means that they believe they have a claim to the (mostly) exclusive use of that word within the context of, for example, video game titles.
The problem here is that they appear to be claiming some trademark violations are taking place *in contexts where they don’t really have any relevance.* They’ll have to prove that the marks or usage infringe on the contexts in which their marks are registered. (In addition to proving that the marks infringe within their applicable contexts.)
Not oniony. Just sensationalist and ignorant.
What about the 🌟 emoji?
Let’s not forget Beyoncé and Blue Ivy. She had the balls to tell a store owner to change their name even tho they named the store long before Beyoncé even had a kid. And now her twins too. Rich people think they can own everything.
Bowel movements are often called #2, so I think it’s fair to assume that Take 2 is just another phrase for taking a shit (specifically on the gaming industry).
I own the word “downvote”. Now give me all your money.