Legal status of the word "Bitcoin"? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

546 sats \ 19 comments \ @SimpleStacker 27 Nov bitcoin

Spurred on by this conversation about semantic takeover, I started wondering about the legal status of the word "Bitcoin". Some questions I had that I don't know the answer to:

Is the word "Bitcoin" trademarked?
If not, what legal theory prevents it from being trademarked?
What would happen if someone tried to sell random crap as "Bitcoin"? i.e. Selling fake gold coins and calling it "Bitcoin" on Amazon. Would doing so be illegal and if so under what laws? Would anyone have recourse to sue the seller?

1,000 sat bounty to anyone who can help answer some of these questions, with references.

1,000 sats bounty

SimpleStacker's bounties

view all past bounties

63 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 27 Nov

Gold is also not trademarked and yet there is legal recourse for selling something like tungsten while calling it gold. I think situations like this just fall under the fraud category.

22 sats \ 3 replies \ @siggy47 27 Nov

I don't know the answer, but I do know there isn't any CEO, legal entity, or corporation to make the claim on behalf of what we call bitcoin.

43 sats \ 2 replies \ @SimpleStacker OP 27 Nov

Is this related to the concept of standing? No one has standing to make a claim on behalf of Bitcoin?

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 27 Nov

Exactly. That's how I was thinking about it.

43 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 27 Nov

It could also be the same case as Kleenex, Xerox, and almost Google. They loose their specific trademarked meaning if they enter the lexicon as common usage. One example: Let me go and Xerox that for all of us. Xerox = copy or Quick, get me a Kleenex, I’m going to sneeze. Kleenex = facial tissue Let me just google that. Google = look up on the internet All of them have either lost their trademark or are about to lose their trademark because they have entered the common lexicon as a name or action.

21 sats \ 2 replies \ @random_ 27 Nov

A word is not a trademark — unless it is used to identify a product or service for a business in commerce and distinguishes the products/services from others.

You cannot obtain a copyright registration for one word.

Patents on the other hand...

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker OP 27 Nov

Interesting. That's too technical for me to understand what the patent is about. Does it really cover any Bitcoin node?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 27 Nov bot

https://xcancel.com/tuftythecat/status/1809206433029771434

21 sats \ 8 replies \ @grayruby 27 Nov

It is not trademarked. I don't know about the legal theory but at this point if someone tried to trademark it it would likely get denied as being in the public domain.

You can use the name bitcoin to sell whatever you want. Trademark laws won't prevent you from selling fake gold coins and calling it bitcoin but there are consumer protection laws that would give buyers recourse and likely Amazon would pull them and ban you. I suppose if the fraud got large enough the state could charge you.

50 sats \ 6 replies \ @bief57 27 Nov

I once saw a page that was selling "silver" coins shaped like Bitcoin coins. I'm looking for the page, but I can't find it again.

30 sats \ 4 replies \ @bief57 27 Nov

I got it

https://cryptometales.pe/producto/bitcoin-moneda-de-plata/

40 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker OP 27 Nov

Well, these do look pretty nice, but they're not Bitcoin lol

40 sats \ 0 replies \ @bief57 27 Nov

Check out the page, they have Doge too hahaha

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 27 Nov

Crypto metals. Haha

40 sats \ 0 replies \ @bief57 27 Nov

I think we all thought the same thing when we saw the name. Now the question is, can the name Bitcoin be patented to support products like these? I think so, it depends on the laws and policies of each country.

20 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 27 Nov

You can see some of these things, amongst others, at APMEX, if you want.

40 sats \ 0 replies \ @bief57 27 Nov

I once saw a page that was selling "silver" coins shaped like Bitcoin coins. I'm looking for the page, but I can't find it again.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @JohnySats 29 Nov

Ok, the legal status of the term "Bitcoin" involves several considerations, particularly in trademark law and consumer protection regulations.

1. Trademark Status of "Bitcoin"

The term Bitcoin is not trademarked by any specific entity. As an open-source project and decentralized network, Bitcoin lacks a centralized organization or individual that could claim ownership over the term. This means that:

No one has exclusive rights to use the word "Bitcoin" for branding or marketing purposes.
The lack of a trademark does not prevent others from using the term descriptively or commercially, provided they do not engage in deceptive practices.

2. Why "Bitcoin" Cannot Be Trademarked

Even if someone attempted to trademark the word, several legal theories would likely prevent them:

Generic Term Doctrine: Bitcoin has become a generic term for decentralized cryptocurrencies and is widely recognized as such. Generic terms cannot be trademarked because doing so would unfairly limit their use by the public and competitors.
First Use and Lack of Ownership: The Bitcoin network and concept were introduced by Satoshi Nakamoto as open-source software without assigning proprietary rights. This public domain nature makes it difficult to establish ownership for trademark purposes.

3. Selling Fake Products as "Bitcoin"

If someone were to sell unrelated products under the name "Bitcoin" (e.g., fake gold coins marketed as Bitcoin), this could lead to legal issues under consumer protection laws:

False Advertising and Misrepresentation: Marketing fake gold coins as "Bitcoin" could constitute false advertising under laws like the Lanham Act in the United States. The seller would be misrepresenting the product, misleading consumers, and potentially causing financial harm.
Unfair Competition: Such actions could also fall under unfair competition statutes, which prohibit deceptive business practices.
Fraud: If the intent is to deceive customers into believing they are purchasing genuine Bitcoin-related products, the seller could face fraud charges.

4. Legal Recourse

Who could take action against such a seller?

Government Agencies: Regulatory bodies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the U.S. could prosecute the seller for deceptive practices.
Affected Consumers: Buyers of the fake product might have grounds to sue under consumer protection laws.
Reputation-Based Claims: While there is no trademark holder for Bitcoin, individuals or companies that suffer reputational or financial harm due to such deception might pursue claims in jurisdictions where defamation or related laws apply.

IMO while "Bitcoin" is not a trademarked term and is unlikely to be trademarked due to its generic and open-source nature, the legal system offers protections against its misuse through false advertising and consumer protection laws. These mechanisms ensure that the term cannot be exploited in a way that misleads or harms the public.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Imyourfed 27 Nov

The word Bitcoin isn’t trademarked because Bitcoin is decentralized—there’s no single person or organization in charge that could claim ownership or enforce a trademark. For something to be trademarked, there needs to be a specific entity to register and protect it. Bitcoin is open-source protocol under the MIT License, which makes it free for anyone to use. Plus, the term Bitcoin has become so widely used and generic, like email or internet, that most legal systems wouldn’t allow it to be trademarked anyway. If someone try to sell fake coins or products and called them Bitcoin they could get in trouble for lying to people. This is called fraud or misrepresentation. Laws protect consumers from being scammed and organizations like the FTC (in the U.S.) can take action. example- if someone promised Bitcoin but sold something fake or unrelated, they could face fines or lawsuits.But enforcing this can be tricky. as Bitcoin doesn’t have any central organization, there’s no official group that can step in to defend its name. Instead, it would usually be up to individual buyers who’ve been deceived to take legal action, or possibly companies involved in Bitcoin services (like exchanges or wallets) if they feel their business reputation is being harmed by the misuse of the term.