Home Gaming Stupid trademark claim against Oculus Rift

Stupid trademark claim against Oculus Rift

1 min read
21

Oculu rif

Obscure video streaming service “Oculu” has filed a frankly ridiculous claim against “Oculus Rift” for… having a similar name, I guess?

The claim is, and I quote; “false designation of origin, trademark dilution and unfair competition”. So let me get this straight, they are trying to lodge a complaint against a company whose products and services couldn’t be more disparate from their own, seemingly unaware that the Oculus brand name comes from the Latin root for “eye” a link not so disparate from their actual product. As for trademark dilution, the trademark for the Rift was back in 2012, while Oculu, according to their LinkedIn account has been operating since 2003. So for me this is their only point in the matter, at least it would’ve been if this quote wasn’t attributed to it:

“Unfortunately, [Oculus co-founder Palmer] Luckey, decided that he would simply add an ‘s’ to Oculu’s registered trademark and call his product and online video distribution network, Oculus. It could have adopted any number of trademarks.”

There’s a lot wrong here. As I’ve already said, Oculus is from the Latin root for “eye”, so it’s more like they deleted an s to make Oculu, so that’s just silly. Furthermore, Oculus isn’t an “online video distribution network”, so that’s just blatantly false. So as you can see, their argument is really weak and they should just be ridiculed for trying to pull this crap on a brand that’s much better established than they are and are in no way infringing on their trademark. I hope Oculus VR doesn’t mind my goat milking service “Oculu Rif”.

Last Updated: February 13, 2014

21 Comments

  1. Dammit king.com. You done fucked it up….

    Reply

  2. Alien Emperor Trevor

    February 13, 2014 at 13:09

    The stupid, it burnssssssssss

    Reply

    • Hammersteyn

      February 13, 2014 at 13:16

      My IQ cramps after reading this.

      Reply

    • Admiral Chief in Vegas

      February 13, 2014 at 13:26

      lolz

      Reply

    • RinceandLeSIGH

      February 13, 2014 at 13:41

      HAHAHAHA! Nice!

      Reply

  3. Sir Rants A Lot Llew. Jelly!!!

    February 13, 2014 at 13:09

    Bwhahahaahahahahahaha.

    That is all

    Reply

    • AndriyP

      February 13, 2014 at 13:15

      +1

      Reply

    • Hammersteyn

      February 13, 2014 at 13:15

      Short and to the point, I like it.

      Reply

  4. Hammersteyn

    February 13, 2014 at 13:16

    Childish really.

    Reply

  5. El Capitan del Blade

    February 13, 2014 at 13:27

    WELP, there goes my idea for a porn streaming service, OcuLUST…. :

    Reply

    • Admiral Chief in Vegas

      February 13, 2014 at 13:28

      XD

      Reply

    • VampyreSquirrel

      February 13, 2014 at 13:44

      Careful, Darryn or Geoff might just steal that and get it registered

      Reply

  6. RinceandLeSIGH

    February 13, 2014 at 13:44

  7. Laby

    February 13, 2014 at 13:51

    First Candy Crush and now this?

    Reply

  8. Unavengedavo

    February 13, 2014 at 13:51

    So Does this mean I can sue Lionhead Studios for using my nick name in one of their games? I got the nick name Avo in 1999 and they used it in Fable in 2004!

    But then again, I don’t mind being revered as a god. Even if it’s in a video game.

    Reply

    • Mark Treloar

      February 13, 2014 at 14:36

      Farmers market can sue you for trying to be an Avo.

      Reply

      • Unavengedavo

        February 13, 2014 at 15:10

        That is still an ongoing trial… I cannot share any information with you O_o

        Reply

  9. General JJ the ashamed

    February 13, 2014 at 13:53

    Any chance they can to make a buck.

    Reply

    • Pascal Torvin

      February 13, 2014 at 20:57

      They are hoping to score a settlement, because the cost of just showing up in court and hiring lawyers to defend themselves is costly.

      Reply

  10. Umar Reborn

    February 13, 2014 at 15:10

  11. BacchusZA

    February 13, 2014 at 15:55

    The statue books need to be amended so that when a plaintiff brings crap like this to court the judge is allowed to call them over to his bench so he can summarily kick them square in the nuts for wasting everybodies time. He should then be allowed to offer the defendant the chance to get in a kick or two, just to make sure the point is driven home.

    I have an idea we’d see a lot less bullshit litigation if people ran the risk of their voice going up an octave or two if they tried a obviously phony stunt like this.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Check Also

“Tetris Effect: Connected” Out August 18th for Steam, PS4, Epic & Oculus

Enhance Games has announced that Tetris Effect: Connected will release on August 18, with …