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

Selfhosted

46393 readers
828 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
[–] Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee 50 points 2 weeks ago (18 children)

Of all the things you could do with your finite existence in this world, you choose to dispute the name of an open source selfhhostable bookmarking app

🤦‍♀️

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago (16 children)

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

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

Rebuttal, it's called "hoarder"

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

And apple is called Apple.

I didn't say the law is good.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks 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 2 weeks ago (1 children)

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

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

I thought you said they didn’t?

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks 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 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks 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 2 weeks 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.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)