Thank you for the private replies that some of you were kind enough to give me. I first became aware of the situation between Dashcoin and Darkcoin/Dash through a third party. I don't have a client. A client pays. I have simply been acting as 'a McKenzie Friend'. I signed my private communications to you all as 'McKenzie's Friend'.

There were no secret agendas to push. For my part, I was motivated by the injustice I saw and the possibility of helping the under-dog. Some of you might understand where I was coming from and the pleasure that can be had by winning such a fight. I have been involved in legal disputes at the highest level and have achieved good results. When that type of pay-off enters the blood stream, it can become addictive; like a performer receiving regular applause, and feels continually compelled to come back for that endorphin fix.

In trying to resolve a situation, you have to consider all available options. My personal choice, if I had been a member of the Dashcoin Community, would have been Option 2: Stop Darkcoin with their trademark application, and stop them from using the word 'Dash'. If anyone is to involve themselves in a battle it is advisable to test the resolve of the troops. My private messages to you all emphasised that as a community you should decide what you wanted. I also indicated that you should communicate privately by IRC, or whatever was best for you. That has been ignored and individuals have spouted their opinions publicly.

I make no apologies for applying 'pressure' on Evan Duffield. There was more to come if needed. Some of you might have understood what I meant by 'a loose translation' of Evan Duffield's exploration of what it would take to resolve the situation. Most of you have received copies of that message. Evan was explorative of what I wanted. I switched the emphasis to what the community wanted. Some might view this as putting out the 'feelers' for a bribe.

This brings me to the fact that individuals can be 'bought off' very easily. It has been done before and most likely will be done again. If Darkcoin/Dash succeed in their trademark application, they could insist that exchanges like Poloniex de-list Dashcoin. Prior use arguments are only useful before the trademark is granted. Trademarks are virtually absolute after being granted. You have a time limit to put in a prior use objection, if that is what you want.


I know that there are some decent people within the Dashcoin Community and to some I have sent further private messages. I wish you well. For my part, I choose not to be involved with this issue any further.

As far as others are concerned, I leave you with these words to peck over like pigeons in the street.

The European Union is a group of individual nations. They are also a legal entity. They vote on major issues as a community just as the Dashcoin community has done. It is for the Dashcoin community to decide what it is. If they are not a community, then I too will simply act as an individual and walk away to leave them to their fate. I dislike uninformed opinion.

Evan Duffield has responded to a message that I sent to him. Loosely interpreted and summarised, the tone of Evan's response is exploratory as to what the Dashcoin Community wants in order to resolve the dispute between Dashcoin and Darkcoin/Dash. I have sent copies of that communication to prominent members of the Dashcoin Community.

With regards to an action of 'Passing Off', I would advise against that for now. Whilst there may be some merit in it, such actions are time consuming and can take years to complete, with the losing side often having squirreled away all assets to become a 'Man of Straw'. Claiming costs and damages from a 'man of straw' is not a good outcome. To my mind, the Dashcoin Community have far more effective weapons at their disposal with which to protect their interests. For instance, putting in an objection to all applications for the trademark 'Dash' in the class that covers electronic currency on the ground of prior use.

If Darkcoin/Dash succeeeds with their trademark application, it could make life difficult for Dashcoin. Intellectual Property Offices worldwide seek out examples of prior use when an application is made to them. They should be made aware of that prior use by the Dashcoin Community as soon as possible.

It would be useful to find out what the Dashcoin Community wants. A preliminary option appraisal might consist of:

Option 1. Do nothing. Always an option.

Option 2. Stop Darkcoin/Dash from using the name Dash.

Option 3. Accept some form of a buy-out compromise. This could involve a direct payment as a community member with an adjustment for the amount of Dashcoin held.

As a community please let me know what you want. I will help in any way I can.

I am researching the circumstances of and the justification for Darkcoin's change of name to 'Dash'. I have found some of the comments made in this thread interesting. I have also posted on the Dash Bitcoin Forum pages 5094-5097 regarding this and have received some responses.

I would invite anyone who can shed light on this matter to message me privately.

I would like to clear up some misconceptions:

1)  I am not an investor, but someone acting on the behalf of a third party who is;

2)  I am not pushing an agenda, but someone who is merely following one. Consider it to be an informal protocol;

3)  my prime goal at this juncture is to ascertain the facts;

4)  I have been led to believe that it was a community decision to use the word "Dash", so I thought it logical to consult the community as to why, considering the circumstances. I have also sent a private message to Evan Duffield with regards to this, but have so far not received a response. I am not overly concerned about this at the moment since the type of response that I am looking for is a considered one.

In case that answers to my questions might prove difficult for some to provide openly in this forum, I would invite anyone who can throw light on this matter, including the legal justification for the continued use of the name 'Dash', to message me privately. That is where I intend to keep this from now on.

I have become aware that this is quite an emotive topic. I would appeal for calmness to prevail.

Thank you for giving me the paperback version. It saves me wading through the 5,000 pages of this thread. I did finally manage to watch the interview with Evan Duffield that BrainShutdown pointed me to, in order to explain why the name "Dash" was chosen, when there was an existing Dashcoin community that used the word Dash in reference their coin and to themselves.

The interview was published on 17th March 2015, some 12 weeks ago. Unfortunately, I didn't find the precise answer that I was seeking. I did, however, find material particular to the current discussion: that the 'Darkcoin' name had negative connotations; that a member of the Darkcoin community suggested the name 'Dash'; that Evan mentioned that Darkcoin was in the exploratory "stages of legal work" on the viability of using the Dash name.

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-196-distortions-towards-privacy-or-many-hands-makes-light-work

I like to check the facts, which some of you might have noticed that I am quite keen on doing. I just have a few more questions:

You mention that Dashcoin was a "dead coin". How was that conclusion come to? The Dashcoin community seem to be very much alive.

Does purchasing the Dashcoin GitHub account amount to purchasing the rights to the Dash name? Am I right in assuming that GitHub is an open source project? It would seem that no one person owned Dashcoin and that the Dashcoin community contributed to any good name that it might have.

Did it not occur to anyone that appropriating a name in such a manner might be viewed as being underhand and that it might reflect badly upon Darkcoin/Dash at some point in the future?

Could it not be foreseen, that some in the Dashcoin community might not want to be associated with the Darkcoin/Dash reputation, much evidence of which can be mined by looking through Darkcoin/Dash's voluminous, 5,000 Bitcoin Forum pages?

I believe that there are compelling legal reasons why Darkcoin/Dash should consider another name change as a matter of urgency. Darkcoin has done it before and should be able to do it again. There is evidence of 'confusion' between Dashcoin and Dash and that might be an important point to consider.

My intention is not to talk Darkcoin/Dash down, and I have tried to be sparing with my choice of words. I hope that some of you will appreciate that. This may be my last post here. My next port of call will be to send a private message to Evan Duffield. In the meantime, any answers to my questions would be appreciated.

And thank you, once again, to BrainShutdown and GhostPlayer for your helpful responses.

On the contrary, I can assure you that I am very interested in the answers.

Why do you attempt to smear, rather than give straightforward answers to simple questions? Are my questions too hard for you? I believe that they are questions that any investor, or potential investor would be interested in knowing the answers to.

Thanks again. I'll take a look later when I have more time, but so far I've not had simple answers to a couple of simple questions.

Never-the-less, Darkcoin's change of name to Dash could open up a legal minefield, which could rear its ugly head in the not too distant future.

So, considering all this, why was the name "Dash" chosen?

Thanks. I read the part where your developer states that:

"I no longer feel the name Darkcoin reflects the true essence of the project and have decided to rebrand our product".

But that only partly answers my question.

Why did he think that the name Darkcoin no longer reflected the product? Anonymity is a concept still prominently used in the product's tagline.

Your developer goes on to state that: "Currently we’re investigating the name “Dash”." Was the developer not aware of the pre-existing Dashcoin - and the Dashcoin community, who referred to their coin as Dash, and to themselves as the Dash community?

The name is similar and is causing confusion. So, in light of this: why was the name "Dash" chosen?

Why did Darkcoin change its name to Dash?