Subject:
|
Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Thu, 5 Feb 2004 01:46:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1829 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Allister McLaren wrote:
> This is on a purely conversational level though (including online
> conversations such as these), which I really don't think can or should be
> policed for something as tedious as trademark violations.
They can, but not for stuff like this. Ignoring the trademark-owner's wish on
usage does not actually constitute a legal trademark violation. Improper usage,
yes, but legal violations are only when one person is using and/or claiming as
his own a trademark that belongs to someone else.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
| (...) This is pretty much my position. The purpose of language is to communicate ideas. It doesn't really matter what words are used, as long as the idea behind them is understood. If using 'legos' or 'lego' communicates the idea as well as using (...) (20 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
35 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
