Beam vs beam: Is it legal for two projects having the same name/ticker?

1

Hello everyone!

I don’t know if you all have heard about this. Recently, I came across a token named Merit Circle (MC) which is about to migrate to the beam blockchain. I was really surprised at the moment thinking that there would be a big event happening on the Beam blockchain, that Beam would be used to power web3 games and it would be relisted on binance again. However, as I digged in more on this news it turned out that the beam mentioned in the news is not the Beam Privacy, although it is likely they would use BEAM or BEAMX as their ticker when they sell on binance somewhere this November. More on this news can be read here:

My question is: is it legal for two different projects having the same name/ticker? as far as I know that the Beam Privacy emerged first before this so-called second beam thus having the right for the Beam name/ticker, am I right? please give me enlightment all. thanks!

2 Likes
2

When this began around April, they were called ECO and it was all about instant transfers - not games. I’ve watched both videos (then and now) and I think it’s the same people which spells scammers.

3 Likes
3

Yes, it’s legal, because we don’t have the copyright for the name “Beam” (because it’s essentially impossible to copyright).
The exchange needs to decide if they give MC BEAM the same ticker or give them another ticker, such as BEAMX like MEXC and Binance did it: | Trade BEAMX/USDT BEAMX on MEXC Exchange.
Which is annoying, because when we eventually want to list BEAMX on MEXC, we get another ticker…

4

Thanks for the info!

I just did a quick search on this copyright thing (please note I’m not an expert on legal things, though), and according to this article: Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights: The Basics that names/words can be trademarked. I hope that the Beam Foundation has trademarked the name Beam so that they can take legal action on this.

Anyway, regardless the name Beam has been trademarked by the Beam Foundation or not. I think It’s still unethical for a project to use another project’s name, especially in the open source community, right?

5

Yes, it is unethical to use another projects name, but they have openly said that they don’t care.

6

oh… that means they have changed their project name before ($ECO :arrow_right: $MC), am I right?

1 Like
7

LOL… I wonder why don’t they use bitcoin as their new name, they would get instant fame. :sweat_smile:

1 Like
8

I think they rebranded to BEAM because of their platform called onBeam

9

I don’t know. It’s strange to watch their ranking more towards Top 100, now at 130 at CoinGecko. I’ve never been into Games and think it’s some weird social fad that’s overdue for a wipeout.

10

this is an issues for sure for beam

11

A few marketing ideas

  1. Rename ticker BEAM to BEAMW and the BEAMX gov token in BEAMWX.
    Something like Best Exchange Awesome Mimble Wimble.
    We completely missed the good story telling “Mimble Wimble”. Just watch MimleWimble Coin has 200M Capitalization with very small volumes (less than 10000$/day).
  2. On web site, indicate clearly “Mimble Wimble” and the size of Beam Blockchain which is a very important argument.
  3. Indicate : A complete DEX with Stablecoin and NFT in a Pocket Size Blockchain usable on a smartphone with maximum security.
12

Not sure about that, BEAMW and BEAMWX are really not great tickers.

It’s one of the first words you read on the website. The blockchain size could be mentioned yeah.

grafik
grafik1309×880 163 KB

Again, already mentioned, but the phone part could be added.

grafik
grafik1307×782 76.7 KB

13

i think Maya DEX, Sarai DEX & Haveno P2P need some beam lobby

14

why should beam give up its great name ?

i say lobby other DEX & P2P Trading and done