No it wouldn't.

Again. Please try and understand what I'm saying.

The differences in other branding are sufficient that no one looking at the webpages or whatever they clicked on would be confused. There's not a likely chance that someone is going to confuse Demon Hunter the Metal Band with KPop Demon Hunter the Anime. And even if they did click the wrong link there's no real harm. All it really means is that whoever took the wrong link hop needs to work on their google-foo.

I mean. really. look at the difference in branding:

Vs:

The concept of "Demon Hunter" as a thing is something that's common enough that it's going to bump into other brands. It's not like they went after the 2005 movie "Demon Hunter"

and while things may have fallen through the cracks, but when you apply for a trademark the USPTO searches their database to verify that there's nothing already trademarked that you might be infringing on. given that netflix has a trademark, that search happened in some form and they decided it was acceptable.

Not only do you not know what makes a potential trade mark generic, but you don’t know what a straw man is either …

It's interesting.

from wikipedia a straw man fallacy is :

A straw man fallacy is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

My statement:

The thing is a trademark can’t trademark something “generic”.

Like you can’t trademark “chocolate dreams” ans a name for a band… and the go after some one that uses the phrase “chocolate dreams” for an unrelated movie.

Because no one is likely to confuse the band for the movie.

to which they replied:

Generic is not what you think. You’re trying to make the case that all words in the dictionary are generic. I’m sorry you’re just wrong about this.

Which absolutely is not what I was trying to say. So yes. They misrepresented my argument. Are you trying to say they didn't attack it?

Further... My response to them, which you replied to with out apparently reading.

First off there’s a reason I put it in quotes.

and that reason was because I knew pedantic idiots like you would conflate the word "generic" with with the legal term "generic trademark." The argument that I'm making is that "demon hunter" is common enough that it's not particularly specific; and that further, no one is likely to be confused between the two.

And the USPTO agreed- more or less- when they gave netflix a trademark for "KPop Demon Hunter"- because checking for potential conflicts is part of the process.

by 'generic' I meant that you can't trademark something thats generic- Like I can't open a shop at the State Fair and trademark "turkey legs" because I'm selling shoes that look like turkey feet and then go after the people selling roasted turkey legs.

Does that make sense? they probably would reject that trademark, actually. Or require it be more specific.