Some have been unsure if easy.com will except Easy Peasy as it starts with Easy. So I asked them. Here’s the answer:

Dear Jon

Thank you for your e-mail regarding your proposed use of Easy Peasy.

It is unlikely that we would take action against you if you comply with the following;

– always use Easy Peasy as two words (I see that it is sometimes written on your website as 1 conjoined word  ‘easypeasy’ – this would need to change)
no use of easyPeasy (lower case ‘easy’ and capitalised ‘P’ for ‘peasy’
no use of orange/white – i see your website contains an orange/white logo – this would have to stop
– no use of our font (known as Cooper Black)

Please note that in the event that, for example, confusion arose between  your brand and our brands or you moved into a business sector in which we trade, or you did not comply with the above, then we reserve the right to take action against you.

Please feel free to submit your proposed logo to me for comments prior to use.

Kind regards

Kirsten Doherty
Trade Mark Attorney

Tags: , , ,

No Responses to “Mail from easy.com”

  1. tasso December 20, 2008 at 7:04 pm #

    well, I suggest you to create (maybe with the help of a lawyer) an how-to with all the rules to avoid problems with easy.com, Asus and Canonical, and put it on the wiki.

    I like orange logos… :(

  2. Serola December 20, 2008 at 8:53 pm #

    I hope easy.com don’t object logos with lower case e :(

  3. macs December 21, 2008 at 12:20 pm #

    wow, so orange color is a trademark of easy.com? great :D

  4. burtdayt December 21, 2008 at 8:38 pm #

    Un-friking-believable !!!

    If you have the resources, hire a trademark attorney.

    Jesus !

    Will people ever just let you be who you want to be ???!!!!

    — Burt B.

  5. Superfrog December 22, 2008 at 12:08 am #

    WTF?

    – always use Easy Peasy as two words (I see that it is sometimes written on your website as 1 conjoined word ‘easypeasy’ – this would need to change)
    –> why it has to change ? easy**** (anything) can’t be registered as a trademark who lock any possibilities!

    – no use of easyPeasy (lower case ‘easy’ and capitalised ‘P’ for ‘peasy’
    –> why ? this is strictly typo and can’t be registered!

    – no use of orange/white
    –> why ? orange/white logos aren’t their property….! what about the orange company (orange.com)… hahaha. this can’t be registered.

    – no use of our font (known as cooper black)
    –> why ? this isn’t their font, this is a linotype one (http://www.linotype.com/317123/cooperblack-family.html). this is not their property… and, the guys at linotype will be very interested to know that easy.com loose their property and interests…

    – then we reserve the right to take action against you
    –> under which law/country ? i doubt norway laws falls under these non-sense trademarks rules!

    JON, THIS IS A PERSUASIVE E-MAIL ONLY ! DO NOT TAKE THIS ONE AS THEY WANT YOU TO DO !

    This is a completely BULLSHIT! Any lawyer must be laughing reading their e-mail!

    Thanks easyGroup and Kristen Doherty to make us laugh loud!

  6. Superfrog December 22, 2008 at 12:12 am #

    Additionally, it they stand on their aggressive position, contact the FSF and let the people know of this e-mail… Slashdot can be very interested!

  7. ottogiugno December 22, 2008 at 5:22 pm #

    Although the demands of this lawyer seem excessive, I suggest you to avoid using a logo that recalls (also remotely) the graphics used by easy.com, even if you could somehow.
    It’s a matter of common sense and originality, and also people might think that the project could be in some way comparable to easy.com

    So my suggestion is, avoid white and orange, avoid a font that looks like the one they used, but feel free to use “easypeasy” as one word, because this limitation sounds absolutely absurd.

  8. Martin December 26, 2008 at 9:27 am #

    Well, as most of the above already mentioned: don’t be too bothered about all this.

    The most important thing would be that you shouldn’t blatantly violate their trademark. Which in my view would indeed constitute writing easyPeasy in Cooper Black using an orange/white theme. Staying away from Cooper Black and the orange/white combination seems most obvious to me and no problem.

    As the others say, excessive claims on how to write the name could in my view be neglected. It might be wise to stick to Easy Peasy as the brand, but easy.com has no say on how the thing gets named in repositories and code to name a few. I’d also say you better not use Easy without Peasy.

    The contrary would probably hold as well. easy.com should stay away from providing an OS from now on. Not that they would, but still.

    Regards

  9. Perry Zoso December 28, 2008 at 4:04 am #

    To avoid some of these possible problems, perhaps instead of “easy peasy”, you would consider a different name for the ‘ubuntu-eee’ distro. I suggest “uboseee”; it could mean ubuntu based operating system for the eee. It could mean unix based. Looking up uboseee on google returns no hits so you could quickly register a website. When people need help with their eeepc, they usually throw eee and brief text at google.
    Of course, if you want it to support more umpc’s, I leave obvious name changes to readers.

  10. Alastair Scott December 29, 2008 at 4:04 pm #

    “_it is unlikely_ that we would take action against you …” – [my emphasis] written like a true lawyer!

    I wouldn’t worry. Their visual style is so distinctive, and has been plastered all over the UK for a long time (over 10 years I think), it should be easy to work round … or should that be “not hard to work around” ;)

    An interesting page on their Web site though: http://www.easy.com/thieves/index.html

  11. TTB January 1, 2009 at 8:57 am #

    “Please note that in the event that, for example, confusion arose between your brand and our brands or you moved into a business sector in which we trade, or you did not comply with the above, then we reserve the right to take action against you.”

    Sure, a mainly volunteer OS distribution will start selling airplane tickets.

  12. Malcolm Bastien January 1, 2009 at 6:05 pm #

    WTF. I’m coming to this post a bit late but I’m confused.

    Does this organization honestly think they have a reasonable claim to any brand names that simply begin with the word “easy”? That’s so ridiculously broad and pompous.

    As long as you don’t claim to be a part of their “Easy Group” they shouldn’t have any claim whatsoever on easyPeasy. Them actually layout out rules for you to follow is just them trying to screw you.

Leave a Reply