[HN Gopher] YouTuber claims to have received an offer to buy the...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       YouTuber claims to have received an offer to buy the Commodore
       brand
        
       Author : daledavies
       Score  : 68 points
       Date   : 2025-06-08 06:55 UTC (16 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.amiga-news.de)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.amiga-news.de)
        
       | skywal_l wrote:
       | The video from the youtuber:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN8r4LRcOXc
        
       | neuroelectron wrote:
       | It would be interesting if they pivoted to a modern OS stack.
       | lowRISC cpu and so on, everything known and documented.
        
       | dedicate wrote:
       | I feel like the real story isn't 'Can We Save Commodore?' but
       | 'What IS Commodore anymore?'. If it's just a trademark
       | disconnected from its original tech, you're not reviving a
       | legend, you're just starting a new company with a famous name.
        
         | BSDobelix wrote:
         | Just watch the video:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN8r4LRcOXc
        
         | Bombthecat wrote:
         | Famous with old people.
         | 
         | The new generation has no idea
        
           | Lerc wrote:
           | There are people now that know what a Commodire 64 is but
           | have never heard of an Amiga. The C64 made a cultural
           | impression that lasts today. I'm not sure why but anongst
           | those born after both machines had had their day, quite a few
           | have an idea what the C64 was.
           | 
           | Talking to the younger generation about the 8 bit era is
           | wild. I mentioned that my first system (TRS-80) had 4k to
           | someone and they expressed surprise at that you could get a
           | monitor that good back then.
        
             | aleph_minus_one wrote:
             | > There are people now that know what a Commodire 64 is but
             | have never heard of an Amiga. The C64 made a cultural
             | impression that lasts today.
             | 
             | I would claim that in _my_ generation (people born after
             | Commodore 's heyday), those who are interested in
             | retrocomputing topics (a minority) are _similarly_ aware of
             | the C64 and the Amiga and their cultural relevances.
        
             | junon wrote:
             | > I mentioned that my first system (TRS-80) had 4k to
             | someone and they expressed surprise at that you could get a
             | monitor that good back then.
             | 
             | Admittedly didn't register with me at first but this is
             | hilarious.
        
               | kennyadam wrote:
               | Seems like a made up interaction tbh. When would you just
               | say "my trs80 had 4k" without specifics 4k of what unless
               | the other person first said something like "my first
               | computer only had 8MB of RAM" in which case they know
               | from context you're talking about memory, or you out of
               | nowhere say "my trs80 had 4k" to someone and they have no
               | idea what you're talking about and ask if you mean the
               | monitor.
        
               | Lerc wrote:
               | I assure you it is not made up. Obviously it's not the
               | literal words I used, I'm working from personal recall,
               | not notes. It would have been part of a larger
               | conversation I was having. From memory it was part of my
               | answer to the question "how long have you been
               | programming?"
        
               | fortyseven wrote:
               | Oooh, book 'em Danno!
        
           | yapyap wrote:
           | wrong. little idea but not no
        
         | ekianjo wrote:
         | Kind of the same situation with Atari
        
         | Nasrudith wrote:
         | The only 'real' claim I could see to saving Commodore would be
         | something adding backwards compatability this late in the game.
         | It would be of dubious utility, but it would give a claim to
         | legitimacy. Otherwise you might as well let it stay dead
         | because there isn't anything to be gained from using it.
        
       | yummybear wrote:
       | Well I couldn't think of a better steward for the brand than
       | Perifractic
        
         | rwmj wrote:
         | Maybe, but better if the trademarks were released to the public
         | domain (however that could be achieved).
        
           | latexr wrote:
           | I don't think you can have a public domain trademark; that
           | doesn't make sense with the concept. A trademark is
           | specifically to identify the source of a product or service;
           | if it were public domain and anyone could use it, its purpose
           | would've been defeated.
        
             | rwmj wrote:
             | Trademarks can become genericized, which is a bit like them
             | falling into the public domain.
             | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark) However I
             | don't know if the owner of a trademark can legally make it
             | generic.
        
               | latexr wrote:
               | > Trademarks can become genericized
               | 
               | That's not the same thing. Trademarks become generalised
               | terms _in the public's mind_ , not legally. Two people in
               | conversation might refer to a non-Xerox photocopier as a
               | Xerox, but a non-Xerox photocopier company can't just
               | advertise their products as being Xerox.
               | 
               | Additionally, from the wikipedia page you linked
               | (emphasis mine):
               | 
               | > A trademark thus popularized _is at risk of being
               | challenged or revoked_ , unless the trademark owner works
               | sufficiently to correct and prevent such broad use.
               | 
               | Which, again, goes directly counter to the idea of a
               | public domain trademark.
        
               | rwmj wrote:
               | It becomes legal if the trademark owner can no longer
               | defend the trademark. The difference is that here the
               | trademark owner would somehow have to guarantee they
               | would no longer defend the trademark. We're not worried
               | about perifractic, but what about if he dies and someone
               | more litigious inherits the mark? The issue if how to
               | legally say "I will no longer defend this mark, and this
               | will be forever."
        
             | aeonik wrote:
             | I think it's a clever idea, an "open trademark".
             | 
             | Independent certification that something fits a brand but
             | anyone is allowed to use the brand if they pass
             | certification.
             | 
             | It would need a non-profit or government support though.
             | 
             | Things like "Organic" already do that a bit, but it doesn't
             | work too well over there.
        
               | latexr wrote:
               | > Independent certification that something fits a brand
               | but anyone is allowed to use the brand if they pass
               | certification.
               | 
               | But then it's not public domain (which was the argument I
               | was replying to). Public domain means everyone can do it
               | without permission, while applying for a certification
               | still requires a governing body which has the ultimate
               | power.
               | 
               | > Things like "Organic" already do that a bit
               | 
               | That's a classification, not a trademark.
        
           | gapan wrote:
           | > Maybe, but better if the trademarks were released to the
           | public domain (however that could be achieved).
           | 
           | How would that work? So anyone could release anything under
           | the Commodore brand? That would be awful.
        
         | rcarmo wrote:
         | Yep. I don't watch his content very often, but I've done so
         | throughout the years and can't really think of anyone else who
         | could do it "right"
        
       | 0xbadc0de5 wrote:
       | I watched the video and support the effort. They seemed earnest
       | and genuine in their desire to do right by the brand's legacy.
       | However, I can't help but feel that releasing this information
       | before the deal is in place is doing themselves a disservice. I
       | can understand their excitement, but this could harm or derail
       | any negotiation efforts. Business 101: don't count your chickens
       | before they hatch.
        
         | sverhagen wrote:
         | In this case not chickens, but chickenheads.
        
       | arexxbifs wrote:
       | IMHO, what would give real value to retro enthusiasts is BSD
       | licensing all the Commodore (and Amiga) IP, rather than these
       | constant efforts to slap the chicken lips logo onto some random
       | hardware in the hope of charging premium for an "official"
       | product.
       | 
       | Would any of the many replacement/emulation/FPGA efforts that
       | already exist be better with a specific logo? More convenient?
       | Cheaper? More successful? I have serious doubts.
       | 
       | This feels, as the saying goes, like a big fat nothingburger.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | Context from the link: _Editor 's note_: Commodore Corporation
         | B.V. only owns the rights to the "Commodore" brand and the
         | well-known "Chickenhead" logo. Software rights such as firmware
         | ROMs or AmigaOS are owned by the Italian Mike Battilana or his
         | Amiga Corporation, the same applies to various brands from the
         | Amiga sector.
        
       | prvc wrote:
       | On the building a Commodore game room for sick kids charity idea:
       | one thing they wouldn't have is nostalgia for the 1980s home
       | computers. Just get them Nintendos.
        
         | garciasn wrote:
         | I didn't have a NES growing up; my father didn't allow "game-
         | only" machines in his house. Instead we had a PET > Vic20 > C64
         | > PC over the years. Being I write code for a living, it seems
         | his plan paid off for me?
         | 
         | That said, why can't there be nostalgic 80s/90s consoles AND
         | same-era computers?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-08 23:02 UTC)