That headline is wrong, but the text in the article itself is correct. They did not attempt to “patent” Archetypes-you can‘t patent a name (patents are for ideas/inventions/processes). They tried to trademark Archetypes, but were rejected. I’m surprised their attorneys or someone on their team didn’t research first to find out whether similar names had already been trademarked. Looks like they’ve asked for a 3-month extension to tweak the application and try again. I don’t know why they’re so besotted with the whole “Arch” ”brand” anyway. It was stupid to begin with, and it has now been roundly ridiculed after having failed on multiple fronts. Perhaps they should rethink the whole “Arch” thing and come up with something new and better. God knows they‘ve tried to “rebrand” and reinvent themselves multiple times, they might as well try it with their business/foundation.
I wish the IRS would investigate them.
---
@Chita have you seen this?
No I havent seen it.
I closed my Chita twitter.
I do have another account but I don't follow anyone, so I don't see who tweets my stuff unless you guys report it here.
I got sick of people sharing without credit and people adding their own text to create memes and most of all I was unhappy that a whole video of my drawings was made by someone who gets revenue from adverts. Yes my doodles had been put "in the public domain" by me, and, yes they gave my pen-name in the video but they did not ask permission.
They even took doodles I had only ever posted in here.
I learned a lesson there.
And I will no longer watch youtube videos created by that person.
I no longer make a doodle every time something inspires me and when I do occasionally make one, I will only ever post it in here.
Besides the Harkles are a waste of good ink.