TL;DR:

Semple, a multi-disciplinary British artist, promised to build “a brand new suite of world-class design and photography tools, with an uncanny similarity to the tools you’ve been indoctrinated in.”

“There’s a really urgent need for a suite of creative tools for creators that they actually own rather than rent. In a way, this first started when Adobe and Pantone decided to paywall the Pantone colors and I created Freetone — which was a free color plugin so creators could continue to access their palette,” he says.

“I have lawyers, and I’ve taken advice. We have solid plans in place. I would also point out that nobody has seen the final branding and no software that infringes on any of Adobe’s trademarks has been produced,”

“I have successfully challenged IP owned by Tiffany and Co, Pantone, Mattel, and others over the years. I feel we have a good and thorough understanding of where the legal line is and an ability to get as close to that as possible without overstepping it.”

  • Hildegarde@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Its trademark, not copyright. And it is deliberate. A lawsuit is likely to generate more value in publicity and news coverage than the case will cost.

    That’s why they deliberately chose an infringing mark.

    • Methylman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure its a sure thing for adobe (the established company) that this newer company is infringing per se. You need to do business with the trademark to ‘use’ the mark - the caption makes it sound like they will change their mark before doing any business? On the other hand, advertising counts as doing business where the mark is associated but that can get a bit tricky…

      If we assume this is not an advertisement, then it’s just like anyone else scribbling down the logo of another company on a sheet of paper and saying I made a thing