公司因“Diamond Standard”名称威胁以太坊标准作者
1 分•作者: mudge•7 个月前
我是以太坊“ERC-2535 Diamonds”标准的作者，这是一个模块化的智能合约标准，已经在生态系统中使用了多年。
2020年，在发布该标准后不久，我收到了来自Diamond Standard Inc.公司的商标侵权警告。他们声称我仅仅因为将标准命名为“ERC-2535 Diamond Standard”就侵犯了他们的商标。因此，我将其更名为“ERC-2535 Diamonds”。
当时，我认为以太坊智能合约标准不可能真正侵犯商标——它不是产品或服务。但威胁非常严重，我还是妥协了，主要是为了避免不必要的法律纠纷。
我现在公开了这个故事，并发布了我收到的经过编辑的法律函件（链接如下）。
我还考虑提出一个新的智能合约标准，这将是ERC-2535的简化版本，我想知道“Diamond Standard”这个名称今天是否还会带来任何法律问题。
我非常感谢熟悉商标法、知识产权或开源治理的人士的见解。特别是：
* 技术标准的名称会侵犯商标吗？
* 在没有商业产品的情况下，商标法适用吗？
* 他们的最初主张在美国商标法下似乎有效吗？
* 是否有涉及技术或开源标准命名的先例？
这里是经过编辑的法律函件和我的帖子，解释了背景故事：
[https://x.com/mudgen/status/1997650412090826959](https://x.com/mudgen/status/1997650412090826959)
感谢您提供的任何见解。
— Nick Mudge
查看原文
I'm the author of Ethereum’s "ERC-2535 Diamonds" standard, a modular smart contract standard that has been used in the ecosystem for years.<p>In 2020, shortly after publishing the standard, I received a trademark infringement threat from a company called Diamond Standard Inc. They claimed I was infringing on their trademark simply by naming the standard “ERC-2535 Diamond Standard.” Because of this, I renamed it to “ERC-2535 Diamonds.”<p>At the time, I didn’t think an Ethereum smart contract standard could realistically infringe on a trademark — it isn’t a product or service. But the threat was serious enough that I complied, mostly to avoid an unnecessary legal battle.<p>I’ve now gone public with the story and released the redacted legal letter I received (link below).
I’m also considering proposing a new smart contract standard that would be a simpler version of ERC-2535, and I am wondering whether the name “Diamond Standard” would still present any legal issues today.<p>I’d really appreciate informed opinions from people familiar with trademark law, intellectual property, or open-source governance. In particular:<p>Can the name of a technical standard infringe a trademark?<p>Does trademark law apply when there is no commercial product?<p>Does their original claim seem valid under U.S. trademark law?<p>Are there precedents involving naming of technical or open-source standards?<p>Here is the redacted legal letter and my post explaining the backstory:
https://x.com/mudgen/status/1997650412090826959<p>Thanks in advance for any insights.<p>— Nick Mudge