BlackBerry versus BlackJack: RIM sues Samsung for trademark infringement
[Via Textually]
[Via Textually]
Relevant Posts
- Germany ousts BlackBerry for government VIPs (6 days ago - 8 Comments)
- T-Mobile launching BlackBerry Bold 9700 on November 16 for $199.99 (23 days ago - 24 Comments)
- BlackBerry Media Sync hits version 3.0 with 2-way photo management (12 days ago - 1 Comment)
- BlackBerry Internet Service stricken with global outages? (20 days ago - 14 Comments)
- T-Mobile Complete: a $300 contract-free BlackBerry Curve 8520 with one month service (18 days ago - 4 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Hein @ Dec 10th 2006 4:20PM
wtf is RIM doing? Samsung will love this publicity
crispeto @ Dec 10th 2006 6:13PM
Uh oh, someone might "Dash" out and get the Pearl. Are Tmobile and HTC next? Pretty soon Webster's Dictionary is only going to have these four words "I, want, a, Blackberry" Followed by: "All other words constitute a trademark infringement in US Federal Court - Thank you!"
Hong @ Dec 10th 2006 8:15PM
This is totally contradicting to the impression that Pearl is doing well and there is no competition of BlackBerry out there. Is Samsung such a threat now to the Pearl business? To be honest, now I am getting interested in the BlackJack.
Is RIM going to sue any phonemakers with a smartphone called Black-something? Why should RIM care if other smartphones are not making an impact?
May be it is wise for Motorola to call its "black" Moto Q the "slightly dimmed" Moto Q!
Beware! RedBerry (What is that Telecom company in China?), you will be next!
TCollin6 @ Dec 10th 2006 7:55PM
Doesn't surprise me. Look at how many times Apple has sued a company for putting "i" in front of their product name. It's through the roof. That's business anymore, lawsuits to try and drown the competition.
One man's opinion @ Dec 10th 2006 8:33PM
Obviously the name is a ripoff of BlackBerry, and is an attempt to capitalize on that name.
That being said, it's dumb to sue simply because RIM cannot lay claim to any name beginning with "Black."
All that being said, if you read the linked article, apparently this isn't the first time Samsung has had problems with ripping off a name.
Jon @ Dec 10th 2006 11:20PM
"Look at how many times Apple has sued a company for putting "i" in front of their product name."
That would be like never. Get your facts straight; you don't know what you are talking about. There are many products with i in front of it, unless it's iBook, iMac, or iPod, you are not going to find any relevant examples.
Roger Alford @ Dec 10th 2006 11:25PM
I think the name BlackBerry and BlackJack are retarded anyway....
Point blank, RIM is a company thats hurting after lawsuit after lawsuit, and now they want to sue ANYONE FOR ANYTHING that resembles their company/brand/device, so they can pay off the people who just sued them.
BlackBerry RIM just lost me as a potential buyer.
Big John @ Dec 11th 2006 11:38AM
@Roger: Don't hate the player, hate the game. You shouldn't be hating on RIM so much for doing what is being done to them.
HolyJaw @ Dec 11th 2006 3:13AM
Honestly? When the average consumer sees the BlackJack in the newspaper and ads they DO think it's the new Blackberry etc.
Case in point? My entire goddamn family.
Just because we geek types and technophiles know the difference DOESN'T mean the average person does. This is why they're suing.
TS @ Dec 11th 2006 8:15AM
If I was Cingular I would give RIM two choises: drop the lawsuit or we drop Pearl.
Nini @ Dec 11th 2006 2:47PM
I completely agree with HolyJaw. People will think it is a blackberry and from the blackberry company. In fact I'm sure a lot of people will go: 'ohh, the blackberry people came up with a blackjack :).' And its not dumb for consumers to think that way. I'm sure samsung was going for that effect when they had the play on words. If they had called a fancy camera phone called the blackjack instead, it wouldn't be an issue.
MajorXero @ Dec 11th 2006 3:09PM
I'm kinda surprised by this. I would think Motorola would be more inclined to sue Samsung over the Blackjack. I mean, hell, the Blackjack is a redesigned Q! Not that I like either, mind you. Just making a point.
Ed Hardy @ Dec 11th 2006 5:45PM
The isn't surprising at all. The only reason I can see why Samsung/Cingular named this device the BlackJack is to suggest to users that it is similar to a BlackBerry.
Rather disappointing, actually.
jyp @ Dec 12th 2006 4:09PM
I think we are overcomplicating things here. The name of this device starts with "Black" because it is, quite frankly, BLACK! From all the pictures I have seen, this device is always "Black". It is more "black" than a BlackBerry (Pearl, for example). If Samsung was calling this phone "BlackCherry" or "BlackPearl" or "BlackPerry", I would say Samsung was definitely trying to confuse the market.
Give some credits to the people who want a smart phone. They ARE intelligent people so they want an intelligent device to be more productive.
Only two types of profession wish people were retarded: politicians and lawyers. Please don't give them the opportunity to prove that they are right.
Write letters to RIM, tell them how much you love their devices. Tell them to get rid of some of their lawyers and hire more engineers so people will keep buying their leading edge devices.
Scott @ Dec 20th 2006 3:16AM
Actually Samsung has a fairly different idea in mind with the name of their phone. For once a company actually uses a name in a imagery sense, ie: Blackjack is
1. related to the thin profile of this phone "card thin"
and
2. for marketing in the sense that a "dealer" looking man is "shuffling" different cell phones like a pack of cards which eventually folds all together to form the blackjack much like a pack of cards would finally be folded into each other to be dealt out.
Beau @ Dec 21st 2006 12:13PM
I have a Samsung BlackJack. After a week of trying to decide whether to get the BlackJack or the Blackberry Pearl, I chose the Samsung because it ran Windows Mobile. I was never confused between the two because of the naming of the products. I believe that argumnt is absolutely ridiculous. RIM just needs to produce a more appealing phone next time out. The BlackJack boasts a much better camera and MP3 player. I also enjoy the overall design of the phone.
Hong @ Dec 21st 2006 2:34PM
I agree with Beau. It is obvious the BlackJack is a better phone or RIM would not even bother to sue Samsung. I also think the BlackJack has confirmed RIM's worst nightmare: an experienced cell phone maker created an excellent product running Windows Mobile. If I were RIM, I certainly would do something to discourage more great Windows Mobile phones to show up in the market.
Ablo @ Jan 17th 2007 12:35PM
The name Black Jack is merely a reference to the size of the phone... i.e. it resembles the size and thinness of a card... hence the card reference... it's catchy.. it's marketing. BlackBerry needs to relax a little bit and step their product line up if they feel any infringement. Make a better product and there will be less competition. Personally, I'm going with the Moto Q.
M. Kobina Hasford @ Apr 8th 2007 9:18AM
For those who claim an average user intending to get the Pearl may purchase the Blackjack due to the naming, I think you are insulting these "average people". I cannot imagine any cellphone/smartphone user buying a relatively high tech product such as the Pearl or the Blackjack and not caring to know what exactly they are getting. People are not as dumb as you guys think.
Personally, I think what RIM hopes to gain from this lawsuit is limit FUTURE use of names with the preface "black". What Samsung has done by choosing this name is make people to at least look at the Blackjack, even if they do not buy it (and there may be people who buy the Blackjack instead, knowing fully well that what they are buying in NOT the Pearl). That is what upsets RIM.
Lilac @ Apr 10th 2007 5:04PM
Theres another phone called Black label from LG. LG and Samsung are both Korean.