Under capitalism, what do you want? If you went and put in a bunch of your own time, money, and effort into something, is asking for something back so you can put food on the table so reprehensible? I mean, I'd love it if I were independently wealthy and could go off and do a mission like that and just give it away for free, but some of us didn't get a trust fund and have bills to pay and so, is that really so ridiculous?
Using the heavy hand of the state to threaten violence against people who make a particular tone... yes that is really so ridiculous.
The tone is question is quite close to G2. So, if your guitar is slightly sharp, you'll be making this tone when playing one of the most common chords.
Nobody is threatening violence against you for playing your guitar sharp. I have no idea where violence even came into play here.
It’s a registered trademark. A registered trademark is a legal designation that provides exclusive rights to a brand name, logo, or other distinctive symbol used to identify a specific product or service; they registered Spice Sound or whatever as a trademark.
They did not patent 100Hz.
You would only be liable if you walked around playing your sharp guitar with a sign that said “Get your Spice Sound here” heh
I’m not defending it, and it reminds me of that woman in Baltimore who pissed everyone off by trademarking “Hon”, causing the whole city to
revolt against her.
But it’s far from “threatening violence,” and they’re not patenting the sound.
> Nobody is threatening violence against you for playing your guitar sharp. I have no idea where violence even came into play here.
It’s a registered trademark. A registered trademark is a legal designation that provides exclusive rights to a brand name, logo, or other distinctive symbol used to identify a specific product or service; they registered Spice Sound or whatever as a trademark.
And what happens to you if you don’t abide by the legal protections of the trademark? The government must ultimately use violence or the threat of violence to enforce its rules.
That’s not how audio trademarks work. A sound trademark can represent a product (think Intel jiggle, MGM lion roar) but it can’t be the product.
So in this case I suppose they might be able to Trademark ’Antivomotone’ as a word mark to describe the tone, but no-one is going to be able to trademark the tone itself.
If I discovered that oxygen cured diabetes I couldn't just patent oxygen. This is a discovery (if it ever holds up) that a sound makes you feel a certain way, the authors didn't invent anything
You cannot have a government with a high interest and stake in national security without bringing up all of those 16 identified "critical infrastructure sectors" with you.
CVEs are almost a starting point of truth. The threats can be verified, tested against/for, etc.
They're also tied up in insurance liabilities.
If there are no CVEs, there will be no cyber security insurance.
IP rights are a government legal construction. Legal constructions should be designed to best serve a societal purpose. In this case, a careful balance between the need to preserve incentive, and the need to prevent the many downsides associated with IP protection.
