She obviously doesn’t know Dick about intellectual property law

The awesome-as-fuck movie, Blade Runner is based upon the novel “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?”, by Philip K. Dick. In the novel, the “artificial humans” that the protagonist is tasked with “retiring” are the “Nexus-6” models.

The Google phone launched this week is the “Nexus One.”

And Isa Dick Hackett, Philip K. Dick’s daughter thinks that this is an infringement upon her late father’s intellectual property rights. (source) Obviously, she needs to fire her lawyer, because whoever told her that doesn’t know Dick about intellectual property law.

Hackett believes that Google was referencing “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” when naming the phone. And they probably were. So what? First off, Dick didn’t even coin the word “Nexus.” It happens to be a common English word. (definition) Even if it was not, even if Ol’ Phil did “invent” the word, which intellectual property rights would Google have infringed upon? Patent? Not even arguably relevant. Copyright? What? In a single word? Nice try. Trademark? What products did the Dicks sell under the “Nexus” mark? None.

Of course, if some court is dumb enough to even hear her claim, I’m going to start requiring that anyone who uses the term “asshat” or “douchetastic” pay me $50.

11 Responses to She obviously doesn’t know Dick about intellectual property law

  1. Vincent Clement says:

    Asshat. Douchetastic.

    Just trying to get them in before you start charging $50.

  2. Harry D. Mauron says:

    Ms. Dickhackett is looking for a deal like the one Lucas got from Moto for “Droid” but missed the fact that Droid is a dilutable/famous mark.

    • jfischer1975 says:

      …therein lies the problem with prophylactic licensing deals.  Motorola made the business decision that it would be better to buy a license that it didn’t need, to avoid a potential lawsuit.  It was pretty clever, actually, since they turned the whole thing into a publicity win.  Unfortunately, it has bread a sense of entitlement in this misinformed chick.

      Damn you, Lucas!  Why must you ruin everything?

    • jfischer1975 says:

      oops… I meant “it has *bred* a sense of entitlement”

  3. David Pasquarelli says:

    I want to copyright “douchebaggery”. I know others may have used it but I want to own it.

  4. Deraj says:

    But consider this, maybe Ms. Dick is douchetastic like a fox? Maybe she is stirring up this controversy to bring attention to a 28 year old film. To tell you the truth, my first thought was, “Man, I haven’t seen Blade Runner in a long, long time. I should check it out again.”

    Just a thought.

  5. ChadKnowsLaw says:

    Do you have an unlimited-use license for “asshat”? I don’t want to shell out $50 each time and use it a lot~

  6. Interesting. Evidently this daughter has sued extensively, for whatever it’s worth, and you probably already know the story about A Family Darkly:

  7. Dan Steinberg says:

    leave asshat alone. it’s a purely canadian invention.

  8. Dan Steinberg says:

    as for the original post she is merely being a dick

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: