| |
In lugnet.market.theory, Brian Kasprzyk writes:
> In lugnet.market.theory, Doyle Nelson writes:
> > In lugnet.market.theory, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > In lugnet.market.theory, Doyle Nelson writes:
> > > > In lugnet.market.theory, Brian Kasprzyk writes:
> > > > > > Please also note that Guild of Bricksmiths (not "Brick Guild") is a
> > > > > > trademarked name and should have a TM after it when first mentioned (or
> > > > > > somewhere on the page)... thanks!
> > > > > Bricksmiths
> > > > > Bricksmiths
> > > > > Bricksmiths
> > > > > Bricksmiths
> > > > > Bricksmiths
> > > > > Bricksmiths
> > > > > Bricksmiths
> > > > >
> > > > > So sue me.
> Interesting that you would call it a 'temper tantrum' without even knowing
> me.
He was echoing the sentiment I expressed, I think. And when you look at your
initial words (which I left, for reference while snipping all else away) on
this topic, I think it was a fair sentiment. Stamping your foot and saying
"so sue me" adds nothing of value to the discussion but certainly showed
your pique.
We have a trademark we have worked hard to establish. We are in an
asymmetrical situation, we have to protect that trademark if we want it to
have value, and we do. The law is clear, to protect it, we have to assert
that it is a trademark. We don't necessarily have to insist that everyone
honor it every time, but we have to show a good faith effort of assertion.
Occasionally reminding people that it is a trademark in the avenue where it
gets the most publicity is the LEAST we can do. Sorry if that gets up your
nose but that's just the way it is.
My assertion started with "please", used "should" instead of "must", and
merely stated facts. It even ended with a "Thanks!". No statements about
suing anyone or any threats or anything like that. Certainly if you have a
milder way of making the assertion, I'm open to suggestion.
Please separate that Guild of Bricksmiths(tm) trademark protection effort
(that we bricksmiths MUST engage in) from any comments about making
LUGNET(tm) a better place. The two issues have no relationship whatever, no
matter how some may try to link them.
While some people may well be annoyed that there are people trying to help
with the effort of making LUGNET a better place, and even a few twits who
actively undermine it with non constructive sniping every chance they get,
there are, I suspect a lot more that are glad of it, including many who have
said so publicly.
FUT admin.general if you want to discuss the larger issue of whether making
LUGNET a better place is a good thing to do or not. I stand behind my
efforts to do so and believe I and the others engaged in it (of which there
are several) have broad support. I just wish more people would do the gentle
reminding that is needed in that context instead of leaving it to a few. If
more people did gentle guidance, more often, perhaps it would not be so
worthy of remark.
If you have more to say about the trademark issue itself, I'm not sure where
to suggest you FUT.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
61 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
