FOF #1655 – Space Invaders
Premium Content
You need to be a Feast of Fun Plus+ member to access this.
Join now
or Log in – it's easy!
Jasen Lee, one of the organizers for the Chicago Gaymers Meetup joins us to talk about the big dust up over someone registering the trademark for “gaymer” which describes gay people who like to play games.
Allies Plotted to Force Feminize Hitler with Estrogen



Comments
US patent, trademark, and copyright law is out of control. An artist or inventor should be able to profit from their creation or invention for a limited number of years. US copyright law was created to spur innovation, not to protect the “intellectual property” of corporations for all eternity.
Well whats even more absurd is people and companies trying to copyright things that they didn’t create, merely identified.
hahaha I was hoping you wouldn’t read one of my embarrassing questions but you diiiiiiiiiid. It’s okay though. I laughed when Marc laughed at my silly comment. I’ve had lots of medical issues with by body so I’ve come to resent it and develop a dark humor around it.
back on topic. It is pretty shitty that this unfortunate situation has happened to the gay gaming community because of this fool trademarking a term used by so many. I hope things work out OK for Jasen and the rest of the gay gamer community on reddit!
> I hope things work out OK for Jasen and the rest of the gay gamer community on reddit!
It definitely will work out for everyone. I’m certain we can beat this back.
Thanks for your support!
I didn’t read the whole thing before I read it on the show so that’s why I chuckled. It cracked me up.
Here’s a sample of the show above:
Jasen, your comments regarding the scope and content of federal trademark law were very good! Your example of “Dove” being both an ice cream bar and a bar of soap was particularly well put. I like to see non-lawyers with a solid grasp of the principles behind an area of law.
Sadly, as Chris Vizzini has registered the trademark, he is in a strong position. I’ve handled a few trademark cases in limited contexts, and it’s not my primary area of law…. But from what I understand, I suspect that the best angle of attack would be to focus on whether Mr. Vizzini is actively using “gaymer” in commerce. This is a requirement for ongoing trademark protection. (This is one of the ways that trademark law differs from patent and copyright law: neither of the latter two areas of law requires active “use in commerce” to ensure protection.) If a trademarked domain name isn’t used “in commerce” – i.e., to sell or advertise goods or services – then protection might not attach. See Southern Grouts & Mortars, Inc. v. 3M Co., 575 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 2009). It doesn’t sound like Mr. Vizzini is making hay, commercially, with his presumably valid trademark. Just my semi-educated guess.
I’m sure the Electronic Frontier Foundation will be all over this. They do excellent work, especially in the area of copyright law, which has had more trouble than other areas of intellectual property in adjusting to the online era. (Just ask the RIAA.)
Good luck!
Also – Jasen, in light of your comments, I’m so delighted to be leaving for Portugal one week from today…!
Make sure you spend some time in Bairro Alto if you’re going to be in Lisboa. Ah… the stories I will never publicly repeat.
That’s where my hotel is. (And – by sheer coincidence – the gay bars.)