Subject:
|
Re: May-June 2000 Mania Magazine
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 16 May 2000 18:32:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
653 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Aaron West writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > The main point is I don't think there is any statement about Lugnet(tm) in
> > there anywhere, just the "screenshot", Any such statemnet ought to be no
> > further than the end of the 3 pages of maniac adventures, not buried on some
> > random page if everything else is with its topic, and I scoured that part
> > pretty hard. But I miss stuff all the time, I'm not good at spotting stuff so
> > who can say.
> >
> > I guess you just need to get as big as MLS or Lucasfilm. :-( Wonder how D&K
> > feel about theirs being ignored?)
Heh.. but you shouldn't hafta be good at spotting stuff like that. (BTW, you
might wanna take a lawyer with you the next time you buy a car or make
your "Greatest Hits" CD ;-) But it is their job to be good at displaying stuff
like that. Maybe TLC's got a 'who's watching' list of companies that have
written them about this. More likely, it's a bunch of lawyers that come and go
and pass on 'the knowledge' sometimes successfully.
> Pardon me, but do you think the sloppiness has to do with the mag being
> targeted at children? Perhaps the LEGO execs in "The Department Dealing With
> This Sort Of Thing" did not really have anymore than a browsing/passing
> working knowledge of Lugnet(TM).
If you are saying that they had a browsing-passing-working knowledge of
Lugnet, then they are at fault, because that's enough information to trigger
doubt of the logo's legitimate usage without the owner's prior permission or
at least a 'separate legal entity' disclaimer. It's then up to them to find
out what they can about Lugnet as to its legitamacy as a trademarked business.
Calls can be made, records of correspondence examined, perhaps a search engine
is consulted (how easy!). This is standard detective work. This is what "The
Department Dealing With This Sort Of Thing" does all day long. Most often
though, if they don't want to do the work, or can't be absolutely sure, the
said department says, "Don't use it because we're not sure."
If you use 'targeted at children' to mean that their mags and comics are 'not
nearly as important or quality-controlled as anything else TLC generates'
(such as bricks) you might have a point, depending on how TLC upper management
sees those mags and comics when compared to other TLC products and
departments, but legally a very weak point.
> If so, this is the best opportunity for Todd
> to make himself an "Entity" with whom they should be aquainted.
"Best"? Hardly. As his been said before, it's a logo in a kids' cartoon with
no url attached or trademark reference. The "entity" in question is not being
fairly represented here under the definitions of trademarks and tradedresses
in this country, or under the use of common sense. Someone who has never seen
Lugnet's logo cannot immediately make a mental association as to what or whom
it represents. But that does not excuse or justify anything, even a practical
joke by the artist.
IMO, "best" could come in a number of ways, a few of which could be the Lugnet
url on set boxes (maybe by the alternate sets saying, "For more ideas on
alternate building creations, see ..."); print the url on set instructions; a
link to Lugnet on one (or more) of Lego's web pages; a Lego-Lugnet joint
public building-display-contest event of some kind, etc.
> They, after
> all do not pay for all the free addvertising that goes on here or when I tell
> kids and parents about www.lugnet.com.
> Whatever support you need, just ask it of us "little people",
Why should free advertising here give them permission to use Lugnet's logo
without trademark acknowledgment? But you seem to have altered your first
position in this message from 'hey it's only a kids thing' to 'they should be
thankful'.
-Tom McD.
when replying, "spamcake roasting on a open fire, Jack Daniels[TM] nipping at
your nose..."
(Note that Jack Daniels, possibly while being quite a interesting figure of
lore, and a great adult beverage possibly enjoyed by the Lugnet administrator
while reading this group, is in no way (of which I know) officially affiliated
with Lugnet or its agents. Jack Daniels is a registered trademark of whatever
company owns Jack Daniels.)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: May-June 2000 Mania Magazine
|
| (...) elements (...) Pardon me, but do you think the sloppiness has to do with the mag being targeted at children? Perhaps the LEGO execs in "The Department Dealing With This Sort Of Thing" did not really have anymore than a browsing/passing working (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
22 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
