Because there isn’t a trademark conflict, it’s just too generic of a term to get trademarked in the first place, but it took seven months for USPTO to process the application.
“Tesla applied for the trademark in October 2024 on the same day that it revealed the Cybercab.”
Giving Tesla those trademarks would mean nobody else can call theirs using those terms. Giving both could mean they might argue the terms robocab and cybertaxi were too close and confusing too. But they are all terms we already use for that type of a vehicle.
We didn’t call operating systems windows before windows, and we (mostly) still don’t.
Also the trademark for X is like the trademark for Apple, very narrow in scope. You could start and trademark X as your own pretty much as long as it’s something that isn’t like Twitter.
And many already do exist (and did before musks X)
Because there isn’t a trademark conflict, it’s just too generic of a term to get trademarked in the first place, but it took seven months for USPTO to process the application.
OK that sounds like a somewhat weird decision. Considering we Have things like Microsoft “Windows”, and “Exastore” which are both 100% generic words.
Also “X” is generic, and so is SpaceX and XAI.
Of all of these it seems both Robotaxi and Cybercap are less generic???
Still why didn’t they apply for trademark years ago, since Tesla has been planning on this for years?
Generic in context.
Giving Tesla those trademarks would mean nobody else can call theirs using those terms. Giving both could mean they might argue the terms robocab and cybertaxi were too close and confusing too. But they are all terms we already use for that type of a vehicle.
We didn’t call operating systems windows before windows, and we (mostly) still don’t.
Also the trademark for X is like the trademark for Apple, very narrow in scope. You could start and trademark X as your own pretty much as long as it’s something that isn’t like Twitter.
And many already do exist (and did before musks X)