Oh ho ho boys and girls. This is not a drill

Attached: linkface.jpg (500x300, 319K)

It's REQ, which is why we're testing the burn. Have at least 10k for this ride to the top, but more is advisible.

People still aren't convinced they're partnerships because they don't understand copyright law.

brigittelyons.com/media-logos/

>One fundamental principle to understand is that trademarks are not designed to protect companies. Trademarks are designed to protect customers from confusion.
>If you use the logos in a way that won’t confuse customers or the public, then you probably are not infringing the trademark. But you have to remember to think from the perspective of what would confuse *the public* and not what would confuse you, a sophisticated marketer/businessperson.
>If the logos’ placement, size or usage imply that you are affiliated with that media company, or that you are being endorsed by them, then you may be violating their trademark rights. It might also be false advertising. So you need to be very careful in how you use the logos.

SmartContract would be breaking the law by using these logos if they were not actually affiliated with these companies and had their explicit consent. All of these partnerships are implicitly confirmed and it goes completely over most people's heads.

Attached: 1525227844794.png (1300x1500, 201K)

exactly. the logos being there mean they've been in contact, and at the very least have been given permission to use their logos. given that we know they ran a PoC with SWIFT, its likely that rather than just getting permission they've had more in depth discussions about their tech with VISA, PayPal, HSBC, etc. PayPal is super interesting because REQ and OMG want to squeeze in on their space so they may be more ambitiously working with Chainlink than people have caught onto yet to stay ahead of these upstarts.

I was always under the impression that REQ and chainlink were working together. Is that not the case?

Chainlink works with anyone who wants help with integration, so probably. But that will just make PayPal all the more eager to get any blockchain solutions finished and released.

FAT
A
T

TAF
A
F

Working together means request needs chainlink as oracle
Chainlink doesn't need req though

it was my understanding the logo was not part of the application. in fact it plainly states the word smartcontract has been registered worldwide to a mexican company for tech services one week before link applied. Conversely this leaves open the opposite of what you state in that others may be infringing the mexicans by using smartcontract phrase with tech.

REQ dropped LINK as soon as they realized Sergey and co. are years behind a working oracle service.

It's over lad just accept it and move on to the next meme

Holly shit!
Why is the price bleeding so much??

You can’t trademark a common phrase. Internet, can’t be trademarked. Credit card can’t be trademarked. Podcast can’t be trademarked. Trying is free but smart contracts are a ubiquitous thing nowadays. If he did this in 2009 maybe he would have gotten away with it since nobody had a clue a smart contract was a thing except a few futurists.

I really hope you actually believe this.

just like how airswap needs chainlink oracles for price determinations.

Yes

H U G E

Apart from trying to take our 4 leaf clover, look at that fucking hint with a rocket ship

Attached: 07D8F71C-CD59-4729-BBC3-127146776D58.jpg (1105x1786, 917K)

i dont have to believe if you go and look you can find it registered yourself

Here's a hint: I don't doubt some Mexican company registered it.

Maybe we could give it a shit test and report smartcontract.com to the respective companies in order for them to reveal if they are partnered or not.

You should absolutely do this and report back.