Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You're right in your first para, wrong in the rest.

You can't lawfully squat a brands trademarks, neither in SERPs, domain names, nor in real world signposts.

You can use trademarks for comparison but having a signpost - virtual or actual - that has another brand on it is tortuous infringement. Bait and switch is rightly unlawful.



"Tortious"?


An action that is against a "tort", ie a civil law offence is "tortuous". It's like "criminal" but for civil law.



Hmm, I've been using "tortuous" as the adjective for tort for probably a couple of decades and you're the first person to try to correct me. Clearly I'm using what Wiktionary classes as usage that's obsolete.

Interestingly googling around the principle usage -- to mean pertaining to a tort -- of this spelling is in UK Terms of Use. It's quite hard to search though as often people will talk about tortuous caselaw [1], meaning 'twisting and turning'. Both usages can be in the same document, so Google Search - in particular - is no good here.

Spelling "tortuous": I find supporting documents from the UK Home Office [3], the UK IPO (including in court proceedings for trademark), and in private practice references to UK tort law, eg [2] dated 2019.

I don't consider my usage to be wrong per se but will consider using tortious in international forums (I so wanted to write "fora", lol); thanks for the query, terse as it was.

It's possible we're all using it "incorrectly" of course. I work in the IP sector, we might all be drinking from the same fountain (eg perhaps reading past UK caselaw keeps us archaic).

[1] https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/brand-management/signif..., example of talking about an intricate case that twists and turns.

[2] https://thelawreviews.co.uk/edition/the-intellectual-propert... talking about an infringement of a tort, as tortuous.

[3] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/references-to-the... , note I'm assuming the Home Office is the origin, it's Gov, but I don't really see mention of the department that owns that data.


If "tortuous" didn't already have a completely different useful meaning, I wouldn't object. Calling harmful behavior "tortious" shouldn't be ambiguous. I'm not sure what happened in olden times, but over the last decade "tortuous" has dominated because of clueless spellcheck.


It's just a slight misspelling. It should be "tortious" instead of "tortuous" [1]. Interestingly, my spell checker does not recognize the former, but it does the latter.

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tortious


> googling around the principle usage

While we're on the topic—that's probably ‘principal’.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: