> > based on the zero attempts made to defend it so far, even with blatant violations > I'd > > argue that it's probably already invalid, but that appears to not be a popular > > opinion and I've been called an asshole for stating it in the past. > > No, you're an asshole for thinking that shit magically becomes invalid because you > happen to declare it so with your magical Haze-knowledge about everything. The > trademark is valid until such time that it gets explicitly invalidated by the USPTO, > but fuck me for not wanting to give assholes like you even more ammo, huh?
ok, let me rephrase then, since it's fairly common knowledge that if you don't defend trademarks you lose them I'd say they would most likely invalidate it if anybody was challenged because of the sheer number of violations that nobody has done anything about. This basically makes it worthless.
I can't say I'm a great fan of that logic, or the system, but from what I can tell there's no way anybody could claim those who own the trademark have made any effort to prevent it being used all over the place without the proper mark and without any kind of permission by other people selling various products.
Now if Smit wants to give this a try and see if he ends up on the end of a legal challenge from Mamedev that's up to him, but unfortunately I suspect he would come out on top due to the above.