Tag Archive for: Similar

Rival Information Security Companies Fight Over Use of Similar Brand Names and Logos

/in


Red Siege, LLC v. Red Sentry, LLC, Civil Action No. 1:22-cv-04661-LMM (N.D. Ga., Nov. 22, 2022)

Competing information security companies dispute the right to use the name Red Siege and Red Sentry for computer security consultancies. Red Siege, LLC, claims to have been continuously and exclusively using its registered mark in connection with computer consultancy services since at least 2017. The mark is used in commerce on its website, at security trade shows, and conferences. Red Sentry, LLC, has been using the allegedly infringing mark since 2021, when the company changed its name from “Offensive AI Holdings, LLC” to its current name.

According to the complaint, Red Sentry is a direct competitor purporting to sell identical services and causing confusion in the market. The complaint sites at least one third party who asserted at a trade convention that he believed the two companies were affiliated. Red Siege further contends that the Defendant was aware of the pre-existing mark yet purposefully assumed the name to compete, confuse, and trade off the goodwill and success of the original name-holder. As such, Red Siege alleges willful infringement and seeks damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees and costs.

While Red Siege and Red Sentry battle to use their brand names, domain names, and logos, one wonders whether Red Hat, Inc., which registered its mark in 2000 for similar fields, may decide to enter the fray.

Update: On November 30, Judge May denied Plaintiff Red Siege’s motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order (TRO), giving the Defendant Red Sentry an opportunity to appear and be heard on the merits of the case. A hearing for the Preliminary Injunction is set for December 19.

Source…

Exclusive: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism

/in


The U.S. Department of Justice is elevating investigations of ransomware attacks to a similar priority as terrorism in the wake of the Colonial Pipeline hack and mounting damage caused by cyber criminals, a senior department official told Reuters.

Internal guidance sent on Thursday to U.S. attorney’s offices across the country said information about ransomware investigations in the field should be centrally coordinated with a recently created task force in Washington.

“It’s a specialized process to ensure we track all ransomware cases regardless of where it may be referred in this country, so you can make the connections between actors and work your way up to disrupt the whole chain,” said John Carlin, principle associate deputy attorney general at the Justice Department.

Last month, a cyber criminal group that the U.S. authorities said operates from Russia, penetrated the pipeline operator on the U.S. East Coast, locking its systems and demanding a ransom. The hack caused a shutdown lasting several days, led to a spike in gas prices, panic buying and localized fuel shortages in the southeast.

Colonial Pipeline decided to pay the hackers who invaded their systems nearly $5 million to regain access, the company said.

The DOJ guidance specifically refers to Colonial as an example of the “growing threat that ransomware and digital extortion pose to the nation.”

“To ensure we can make necessary connections across national and global cases and investigations, and to allow us to develop a comprehensive picture of the national and economic security threats we face, we must enhance and centralize our internal tracking,” said the guidance seen by Reuters and previously unreported.

The Justice Department’s decision to push ransomware into this special process illustrates how the issue is being prioritized, U.S. officials said.

A person fills a fuel container at a Shell gas station, after a cyberattack crippled the biggest fuel pipeline in the country, run by Colonial Pipeline, in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 15, 2021. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo

“We’ve used this model around terrorism before but never with ransomware,” said Carlin. The process has typically been reserved for a short…

Source…

Android 12 Vs. iOS: Similar Privacy Features—Security Capabilities Google Offer That Apple Doesn’t

/in


The latest Android 12 smartphone system made a huge noise after it was announced in the recently concluded Google I/O event. Some rumors and speculations even claimed that this new software is the search engine giant’s biggest visual update to date. 

Android 12's Privacy Features are Similar to iOS: Here's What Google Offers That Apple Don't

(Photo : Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images)
A Google logo is shown on a screen during a keynote address by CEO of Huawei Consumer Business Group Richard Yu at CES 2017 at The Venetian Las Vegas on January 5, 2017 in Las Vegas, Nevada. CES, the world’s largest annual consumer technology trade show, runs through January 8 and features 3,800 exhibitors showing off their latest products and services to more than 165,000 attendees.

Also Read: Google Android 12 Massive UI Changes for ‘Material NEXT’ Surface with Fresh Home Screen, Notif Panel, and MORE!

However, Google hasn’t revealed the exact public release of the new Android 12 software.

Although this is the case, some rumors provided possible details about the official launch date of the new Google smartphone system. 

They said that it could arrive around August or September since the previous Android 11 was also released during those months, specifically back on Sept. 8, 2020.

Going back, here are Android 12’s privacy features that are considered similar to iOS security capabilities. 

Android 12’s iOS-Like Privacy Features

According to Vox’s latest report, there are several privacy features of the new Android 12 that are quite similar to the ones offered by iOS. To give you more idea, here are some of them: 

Android 12's Privacy Features are Similar to iOS: Here's What Google Offers That Apple Don't

(Photo : Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images)
In this photo illustration, A thumbprint is displayed on a mobile phone while the Google logo is displayed on a computer monitor on August 09, 2017 in London, England. Founded in 1995 by Sergey Brin and Larry Page, Google now makes hundreds of products used by billions of people across the globe, from YouTube and Android to Smartbox and Google Search.

  • The new Android 12 offers visual indicators when cameras or microphones are activated. This is also offered on iOS. These indicators are great security features for those people who don’t want their apps to watch and listen to them without…

Source…

Monster Energy Opposes Teenager’s Trademark Application Over Logos Not At All Similar

/in

Monster Energy. The company’s name is enough to set the average Techdirt reader’s eyes rolling. The company that makes sugar-heavy energy drinks has become essentially a caricature of an overly aggressive trademark enforcer. This habit is somewhat surprising, given just how often the company loses lawsuits and oppositions, which one would think would be a deterrent for future behavior. Instead, it almost seems as though every loss only spurs Monster Energy on.

This continues on to today, when we learn that Monster Energy filed an opposition to a 21-year-old’s trademark application for his business, Monarch Energy. You’re probably thinking that the opposition is over the name of the young man’s company, which would itself be a stretch as trademark infringement. But, no, it’s over the kid’s proposed logo.

At age 16, Mason McGuire discovered arthritis in his lower back. The mountain biker, baseball player and motorcycle rider wanted to stay active without aggravating his newfound aches. One year older, the Forest Charter School graduate decided to start his own business to mitigate his problems, and hopefully ease those of others.

While taking a business course at Sierra College, the words of one individual continued to ring in his head: “My teacher kept saying, ‘You’ll never learn it until you do it,’” he said.

So he did.

But on July 30, McGuire received a letter that stunted his company’s development. Monster Energy filed a notice of opposition against his company, Monarch Energy, for violating trademark rules. Specifically, it said McGuire’s logo was too similar to Monster’s.

Are the logos similar? No, they damn well are not.

Trademark imageImage result for monster energy logo

Other than the fact that both logos incorporate the letter “M” and both companies list their names below that “M”, there is little to nothing similar about these two logos. The names of the companies, both prominently displayed, are different. The fonts are different. The styling around the letter “M” is different. The rest of the trade dress is different. Are people going to be confused by these two company logos? No, they absolutely are not.

And, yet, this 21 year old has had to deal with this opposition before even getting his company truly off the ground.

Despite maintaining distinctions, McGuire said he was a bit nervous Monster Energy would file a claim against his company, because of Monster’s history of filing lawsuits, so he tried doing his due diligence before choosing the logo.

“I made sure to go over the rules many times that wouldn’t infringe with Monster,” he said. But, he later said he suspected the large energy company might intervene legally anyway.

McGuire acknowledges that there is no trademark police per se, meaning that Monster Energy must be aware of smaller businesses trying to exploit its brand. But, he added, the company can drop the court filing once it realizes an entrepreneur is not acting in bad faith.

“I don’t care too much that they’re going after me,” he said. But McGuire — who has yet to hire an attorney — said he could lose his business with the possible legal fees needed to combat Monster Energy. He also said he can’t afford a new trademark to change his logo, for which he’s already paid.

Monster Energy doesn’t have to care about the harm it’s doing, of course, but it certainly should. Especially when this is yet another example of an opposition that never needed to be filed. But because Monster Energy wants to play the bully, a young man that started a business might lose it.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Techdirt.