YouTube video by MACHIN3

INKit lets you annotate or paint on a 3D View in Blender from an iPad with Apple Pencil, or from an Android tablet with an active stylus.

A Unique Market for Creators that love Blender

Gleich mehrere Technologieanbieter haben diese Woche Updates vorgestellt, die Dokumentenmanagement und Geschäftsprozesse automatisieren. Inkit und Typeform starteten am heutigen Dienstag neue Werkzeuge für schnellere Vertragsabschlüsse und automatisierte Datenerfassung. Sie reihen sich damit in eine Welle von Unternehmenssoftware-Neuheiten ein, die Anfang Juni von Google, DocuSign und Pega ausgerollt wurden.AnzeigeModerne Tools für die Auftragsdatenverarbeitung sparen Zeit, doch […] The post Asana Agentic Work: FedEx spart 1.200 Stunden pro Jahr appeared first on BornCity.

You should not care. Category: SBIR, standing Date: 9 September 2025 URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423724 Inkit, an SBIR program participant, protested after the Army issued a $43,342 task…

Alex is an ambitious PR specialist for an often overlooked hockey team in Texas. She has worked day and night to make a city that relishes in heat and fire, care about the frigid sport, and it is a...

Unlock exclusive content by subscribing now through Inkitt!

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has emerged as a promising solution to mitigate the limitations of large language models (LLMs), such as hallucinations and outdated information. However, it remai...

“It’s a colour of shock, perhaps, but it’s also very pretty, so why not wear it?!” Gun Roswell The colour pinkIt’s more than just inkIt may be a chosen lifestyleOr just some…

The Board sustained the USPTO's refusal to register the proposed mark DOCRETENTION for downloadable software and SAAS for generating, editing, managing, accessing, merging, distributing, protecting and securing documents, files and data, on the ground of mere descriptiveness under Section 2(e)(1). Would you have appealed? In re Inkit Inc., Serial No. 97915050 (June 17, 2025) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Thomas L. Casagrande). Examining Attorney Ian Krussman relied on evidence that “doc” is a known abbreviation for “document” and that “retention” means the act of retaining or the state of being retained. He also submitted evidence of third parties using the term “document retention” when describing their software or services for retention of documents and data. Screenshots from applicant's website discuss its tools for “retention and deletion of sensitive documents,” and tout its products and services as “allow[ing] businesses to completely automate the end-to-end creation, sending, signing, and retention of documents.” All this evidence makes clear that many companies offer software and related services for retention of digital documents and data, Applicant among them. DOCRETENTION is descriptive of such services, putting together a known abbreviation for the term “document” with the term “retention.” Applicant feebly argued that “doc” could mean “doctor,” and so consumers could think that DOCRETENTION refers to a state or medical institution keeping its doctors. The Board pointed out, however, that the mark must be considered in the context of the identified goods and services; "[w]e are required to assume that the consumer knows what the goods and services in the application are and determine whether the proposed mark conveys information about those known goods or services." Next, applicant contended that no one else uses the exact term DOCRETENTON, but again it missed the mark. "That an applicant is the first to use a term and others have not yet done so does not mean the term is not merely descriptive of the applicable goods or services if the evidence otherwise shows that is how consumers will perceive it." Then, applicant contended that the Examining Attorney improperly dissected the mark. Wrong again. "T]here’s nothing wrong with assessing the descriptiveness of the component terms so long as the ultimate determination rests on perception of the mark as a whole." Finally, applicant pointed to other several decision involving other marks, and to several registrations for marks including the terms "DOC" or "DOCU," but the Board pointed out for the umpteenth time that each application to register must be consider on its own record. Applicant urged the Board to resolve any doubt in its favor, but the Board had no doubt, and so it affirmed the refusal. Read comments and post your comment here. TTABlogger comment: A collection of losing arguments for a mere descriptiveness refusal. Text Copyright John L. Welch 2025.