I wouldn't get a lawyer until/if they contact you, and if they do I wouldn't reply until you talk to the lawyer.
I trademarked a name about 7 years ago, it was a long process, and here's a few things that I learned (from a non-lawyer perspective):
1. Like you, I had a reasonably generic name (SaaS and Hub are two established English words, and they are both commonly used in software and IT services). That was the motivation for trademarking, as the chances are high that others will use similar names purely by chance as opposed to copying.
So I trademarked under a defensive strategy so others couldn't come for me, rather than an offensive strategy of going after others. The point is, come up with a reasonably original name (like Google) that isn't a an English word or a mash of English words, and you probably won't have to worry about trademarking.
2. To continue on from point 1, and let's say you create an original name, like Covfefe. You're doing business with it, then 2 years later you find out that someone else is trademarking it. The originality of the name should make it a lot easier to be notified when someone enters the process of trademarking. I think there's a 3-6 month process is which anyone else can object to it being trademarked, and if you've been using it and the company attempting to trademark it hasn't, then it will be thrown out.
In a challenge it comes down to who's been using it longer.
3. Given that somebody has already trademarked the name, and you missed the grace period to object, you could either wait for them to send a cease & decease (maybe that'll never happen if they're defensive like me), or you could change your name.
No toilet paper, it's a precious commodity now. That could probably be its own service. In all seriousness, I decided to concentrate on a specific niche of food-only.
Instagram is only react native in something like 20% of the app. I think it's comments or something, but I remember it was blogged somewhere. The rest is native.
I don't have a horse in this race either (from Toronto, couldn't care less), but I am a map nerd. I had the same confusion as RobertRoberts when looking at the street view too.
Either I'm vastly underestimating how much property on Martins Beach Rd that Khosla owns, or it's poor journalism with a half explanation of the issue.
From what I can see, it's either:
1. The stretch of Martins Beach Rd that runs along the beach, or
2. The tiny road above the row of houses that runs parallel to the stretch of Martins Beach Rd that runs along the beach.
I don't know how it would be 1, as Martins Beach Rd would be a government funded and managed road. According to the map though, both roads are named the same. Somehow I doubt this though, and one of these roads is private, the other is the real Martins Beach Rd.
However, it still doesn't answer why Khosla would be able to close a whole private road when there's what looks like 22 properties on the upper Martins Beach Rd, and 13 properties on the lower Martins Beach Rd - does he own all of them? Really confusing!
I believe this is the crux of the problem - it favours people with minimal external life factors or responsibility, and they’re quite often the ones to rise to power, therefore creating a “well it was good enough for me” sentiment lacking empathy.
While by contrast, there are some people who want to kick back and simply collect a pay check, there is a whole segment of people in the middle ground who are hungry to learn, but are stretched so thin that they can’t outside of work — a whole segment that isn’t being catered for, and therefore an opportunity exists to tap into this.
I've worked for about a dozen tech companies, and all but 1 were like this...and even that one was probably bearable because I got along with the right crowd. It shouldn't have to be like that though, and I'd like to know of any non-toxic tech companies that exist :)
I have mixed feelings of SUS, I empathize with both of these comments. I didn't get into YC, but I was very early through SUS. I was firmly stuck in the idea validation and early build phase.
I have a more positive outlook on the group sessions though. True that sometimes they were energy draining, especially when you were having sessions with people that hadn't been able to put any work in since week 1. But that's due to life factors, etc, many of the groups had people occupied with their FT jobs, and I was slammed with my FT job for a core chunk of SUS too, where all of a sudden a week went by and I didn't really have an update.
However, the accountability was good, and I would push myself to try to have something for an update. Since then I've actually adopted this habit to publishing updates on youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoWGysmHaCM).
Another positive of the group sessions regardless of who made it there (I had some where it was just me and 1 other person), was that it formed a habit of practising your pitching. Even though pitching regularly is well championed by YC, it's hard to practically force yourself to do that unless you're pushed into that role. The group sessions had value there :)
I'm only a new creator so it's not really going to be much for me to worry about, and I can't think of a single reason why anyone under the age of 13 would want to watch my content anyway. It's about as boring adult topic stuff (building a business and corporate life rantings) as you can get.
I hope you can make it work. I am nowhere near the path to saving enough to retire soon. Although I'm still holding onto the hope that I could build my own path start enjoying programming again with the BS and pointless stress removed.
To make that work though, I'm done with the interview circus. It's been such a distraction over the past 3-4 years, that if I wasn't prepping for interviews or staying up to date with the waste of knowledge that they test for in tech interviews, I could've built a successful business already. Now I'm choosing to focus my time there.
I trademarked a name about 7 years ago, it was a long process, and here's a few things that I learned (from a non-lawyer perspective):
1. Like you, I had a reasonably generic name (SaaS and Hub are two established English words, and they are both commonly used in software and IT services). That was the motivation for trademarking, as the chances are high that others will use similar names purely by chance as opposed to copying.
So I trademarked under a defensive strategy so others couldn't come for me, rather than an offensive strategy of going after others. The point is, come up with a reasonably original name (like Google) that isn't a an English word or a mash of English words, and you probably won't have to worry about trademarking.
2. To continue on from point 1, and let's say you create an original name, like Covfefe. You're doing business with it, then 2 years later you find out that someone else is trademarking it. The originality of the name should make it a lot easier to be notified when someone enters the process of trademarking. I think there's a 3-6 month process is which anyone else can object to it being trademarked, and if you've been using it and the company attempting to trademark it hasn't, then it will be thrown out.
In a challenge it comes down to who's been using it longer.
3. Given that somebody has already trademarked the name, and you missed the grace period to object, you could either wait for them to send a cease & decease (maybe that'll never happen if they're defensive like me), or you could change your name.