The rule of law will decide this. If he is first-to-file in certain countries and that is the law, then bitcoin trademark is his rightful property. I applaud him for utilizing the system as it is designed.
Trademarks are not property. They are more like a proper noun to help you distinguish competitors in the marketplace.
Did You Say Intellectual Property? It's a Seductive Mirage (by Richard M. Stallman)
Copyright law was designed to promote authorship and art, and covers the details of expression of a work. Patent law was intended to promote the publication of useful ideas, at the price of giving the one who publishes an idea a temporary monopoly over ita price that may be worth paying in some fields and not in others.
Trademark law, by contrast, was not intended to promote any particular way of acting, but simply to enable buyers to know what they are buying. Legislators under the influence of the term intellectual property, however, have turned it into a scheme that provides incentives for advertising.
So, BTC Economist, by the bolded definition, do you still think that someone else, besides Bitcoin.org, has the right to trademark Bitcoin?
Should any other business try to deceive end users that they are the real thing when they are not, just because they have rightfully(or not) trademarked the word?
Thanks for the link, phillipsjk.
