Using the heavy hand of the state to threaten violence against people who make a particular tone... yes that is really so ridiculous.
The tone is question is quite close to G2. So, if your guitar is slightly sharp, you'll be making this tone when playing one of the most common chords.
It’s a registered trademark. A registered trademark is a legal designation that provides exclusive rights to a brand name, logo, or other distinctive symbol used to identify a specific product or service; they registered Spice Sound or whatever as a trademark.
They did not patent 100Hz.
You would only be liable if you walked around playing your sharp guitar with a sign that said “Get your Spice Sound here” heh
I’m not defending it, and it reminds me of that woman in Baltimore who pissed everyone off by trademarking “Hon”, causing the whole city to revolt against her.
But it’s far from “threatening violence,” and they’re not patenting the sound.
And what happens to you if you don’t abide by the legal protections of the trademark? The government must ultimately use violence or the threat of violence to enforce its rules.
So in this case I suppose they might be able to Trademark ’Antivomotone’ as a word mark to describe the tone, but no-one is going to be able to trademark the tone itself.
CVEs are almost a starting point of truth. The threats can be verified, tested against/for, etc.
They're also tied up in insurance liabilities.
If there are no CVEs, there will be no cyber security insurance.
Follow the rabbit hole.