Update on the Bitaxe trademark case:
@solo_mining claims in legal correspondence that the registration and enforcement of the “Bitaxe” and “Nerdaxe” trademarks were approved by “the owner of the Bitaxe trademark” and @osmu_global leadership.
However, the trademark owner and multiple OSMU members have repeatedly denied that the community approved this registration or had any involvement in it.
That raises obvious questions:
Who exactly approved this?
Was it @skot9000?
Was it @wantclue?
Was it @bitmaker?
Was OSMU actually involved, or is this being misrepresented by solomining?
So there are clearly conflicting statements here. What is the truth?
Solomining also claims that they granted “licenses” to two other sellers for selling "their" Bitaxe products.
Who are these licensed sellers?
Who authorized solomining to issue Bitaxe licenses?
And since when does one shop get to license access to an open-source mining project?
We will get to the bottom of this. We will unconver all this dirty laundry. We will keep asking questions until this is fully clarified, because the open-source mining community deserves the whole truth. We will keep making this public.
This is an excerpt from the original German legal correspondence. Feel free to translate it:
Today, Google notified us that https://t.co/2Wvn3o5KaU was targeted by a counterfeit complaint initiated by https://t.co/dj8XB4XBVM.
Just a few days earlier, Solomining had already filed a copyright complaint with our hosting provider. Now they have escalated to counterfeit allegations as well. At no point did they contact us directly. Everything was done behind the scenes.
This is not an isolated dispute. It is a pattern.
Solomining has also quietly filed trademark applications for Bitaxe, Nerdaxe, the Bitaxe logo, and other related names. We will share the registration links below.
At this point, it should be clear that this is not about protecting the Bitaxe brand from Chinese sellers. We appear to be the only seller being targeted. In our view, this is part of a broader attempt to hijack the Bitaxe project in Europe and use complaints, takedown efforts, and control over names tied to an open-source project for commercial advantage while pushing legitimate competitors out.
https://t.co/2Wvn3o5KaU was the first Bitaxe seller in Germany, long before others entered the market. We sell genuine hardware based on the open-source Bitaxe ecosystem and have supported this space from the very beginning. We follow the same rules as everyone else. From our perspective, the only reason to target us is to eliminate the strongest competitor.
We believe it is fair to ask why no one from the OSMU community has publicly commented on this so far, especially when so many sellers support OSMU through donations for every Bitaxe sold. In a community built on openness, this raises difficult but necessary questions: is OSMU aware that Solomining appears to be moving to take control of the project trademark behind the scenes, and if so, why has no one publicly pushed back?