Is this OK? Should Cakewalk let it go unchallenged, Monster cable would be all over them.
 
http://www.comcast.com/x1?CMP=KNC-IQ_ID_59904975-VQ2-g-VQ3--VQ6-34371375946-VQ16-c&iq_id=59904975&NUM=2
 
J

I say sue em.. 

I don't think they'd have a very good case. They're totally different products and a single character/numeral pair isn't a particularly strong trademark. It would be different if they included the Sonar with it.

I think this one beat out Cake:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_X-1
 
Time to fly...
 
Rimshot
 

 
Well, I don't believe our beloved DAW supplier was the first company to use "X1" anyway.
 
Or "SONAR", or "Cakewalk" for that matter.
 
 

You just wait until Comcast tries to use X2!!!

SteveStrummerUK
 
Well, I don't believe our beloved DAW supplier was the first company to use "X1" anyway.
 
Or "SONAR", or "Cakewalk" for that matter.
 
 

This.
 
 
Apparently there was a another guy who called himself Strummer before too.

The air force should sue Cakewalk.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_X-1
 
The air force had the Bell X-1 which does have a musical sound to it's name.....
 
Then again.....well before cake ever came out with Sonar.... which is infringement on the inventor of SONAR.... Lewis Nixon, who invented the very first Sonar type listening device in 1906 to detect icebergs in the ocean.
 
http://inventors.about.co...ns/a/sonar_history.htm
 

 
 

It's Sonar X1 isn't it? Not just X1. And now it's Sonar X2.
 
When Steinberg re-invented Cubase a few years ago, they rebranded it Cubase SX 1. So if anything, Cakewalk is not the first DAW to integrate the X1 or X2 thingie...

X1 is now dead! Let 'em have it. ....   the name, that is.