this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2025
198 points (97.6% liked)

Selfhosted

45806 readers
398 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Legally required to. If you don't protect your trademark, you lose it.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Rebuttal, it's called "hoarder"

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And apple is called Apple.

I didn't say the law is good.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The company trying to enforce the trademark is not called hoarder nor do they have any apps called hoarder.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh good! Then they have no case and will lose.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

They did not lose. The maintainer of Hoarder had to rebrand to KaraKeep, hence this post.

They didn't son win either, the dispute is ongoing.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I thought you said they didn’t?

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If they had no case they lost. If they have a case, they win.

It's a truism.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The company enforcing their trademark has not trademarked the word “Hoarder” and evidently they won anyway. So I guess it isn’t really a truism, and “having a case” is more arbitrary than you seem to think.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

U think you're just pointing out that trademark law doesn't work the way a reasonable person would assume. I agree, it's crazy. But if they won, then it was relevant to their trademark (somehow), and failure to bring relevant cases can lead to losing it.

So yes, it's weird and sketchy and feels morally wrong. But also yes, it's required and expected legally.

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Is this even true or just a myth? From what I know, law doesn't actually mandate people to be jerkasses. Also at least in sane countries, you can't trademark words that are in the dictionary like "hoard" or "hoarder", since by definition they have prior art.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

linkedin

Good try, but I don't read MBA hallucinations or AI slop.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well, Google is free, you can find the information if you like.

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago

Nah, I chose DDG and got a better result, but thanks!