tl;dr: Trademarks are more to do with logos and branding, their intent being to allow a company to distinguish themselves in a market with a certain identity. Violations of Trademarks are usually linked to consumers being mislead into believing a product is from one company when it is in fact from another.
T-Mobile does not own a copyright for Magenta. They don't own Magenta. If I want to make Magenta chairs they have no say. They would never receive a Trademark on black, however.
If you start making magenta phones, it's reasonable to assume that the average consumer would confuse them with the already popular magenta phones being promoted by T-Mobile, and this might damage their brand, given that your phones might not work to the same standard.
It's generally not good to form an opinion of topics before you actually obtain a relevant amount of education. It can lead you to making yourself look really stupid.
Trademarks and copyrights are two totally different things. See here: http://www.lawmart.com/searches/difference.htm
tl;dr: Trademarks are more to do with logos and branding, their intent being to allow a company to distinguish themselves in a market with a certain identity. Violations of Trademarks are usually linked to consumers being mislead into believing a product is from one company when it is in fact from another.
T-Mobile does not own a copyright for Magenta. They don't own Magenta. If I want to make Magenta chairs they have no say. They would never receive a Trademark on black, however.
If you start making magenta phones, it's reasonable to assume that the average consumer would confuse them with the already popular magenta phones being promoted by T-Mobile, and this might damage their brand, given that your phones might not work to the same standard.
It's generally not good to form an opinion of topics before you actually obtain a relevant amount of education. It can lead you to making yourself look really stupid.