NVK's claim that I read was that someone was infringing on the specific trademark blockclock. Trademark does not cover a process, nor a copyright. It appears that BTCclock created a competing product with original authorship. He mentions that he didn't reverse engineer a blockclock, but even if he did, that's perfectly legal within the DMCA. Copyright and trademark do not protect the duplication of an idea. So either I misread NVK's statement that his actual trademark was being infringed upon and he implied that that trademark was specifically "blockclock", or he is not acting in good faith.