>>53614422This is fucking retarded. There's a reason why copyrights are divided up into different fields.
If someone wanted to make an energy drink with the word "Monster", then yes, these lawyers would be within their right to sue them. They're an energy drink company, and a rival energy drinks competitor is trying to use their brand in the energy drinks field.
However, if someone makes a product called "Monster" and this product isn't an energy drink, these dumbfuck lawyers can't sue people that are in a different field. A video game developer poses no threat to Monster Energy Drink's brand because they don't make energy drinks at all. These copyrights and trademarks are to prevent competitors in a particular field from leeching off the goodwill and reputation of their rival's name.
This is especially true for dictionary words like "monster" and "delta". There are many companies in many different fields that have "Delta" in their name and have it copyrighted, ranging from airplane companies (Delta Air Lines) to faucet makers (Delta Faucet). As long as Delta Air Lines doesn't sudden start making faucets (and Delta Faucets doesn't suddenly get into the airplane business), these two companies that copyrighted the Delta name are allowed to co-exist because they're not infringing upon the other's field.
https://www.erikpelton.com/trademarks-dont-always-have-to-be-unique-peter-pan-delta-moneyball-and-more/So these frivolous lawsuits made by Monster can and WILL fail.
