Subject:
|
Re: Anyone heard this story yet?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 31 Aug 2000 20:40:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
733 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.general, Matthew Miller writes:
>
> > > Sorry but I just have to throw my 2 cents in here. IMHO this is TLC's own
> > > darn fault. It shows their incompitance when it comes to the internet.
>
> > Agreed. In this particular case, it seems pretty logical that
> > "legolandwindsor" is probably associated with the Lego theme park with a
> > similar name.
>
> I wonder though; how can they be expected to police all misuse of their name
> in a case like this? If they copyright legolandwindsor.com, what's to prevent
> some knucklehead from using "legoland-windsor.com" or "legoland_windsor.com"
> or even "lego-windsor.com"? Realistically, and in all seriousness, how can
> any corporation, even an incompetent one, hope to guard against all these
> permutations of its name?
Quick answer... It can't.
Long answer. Companies should use some common sense and be proactive about
registering domains. You won't stop everyone by any means but a company needs
to take the obvious and protect that. www.legolandwindsor.com is obvious and
should have been protected. Actually I would have a lot more sympathy for LEGO
in this case had they registered www.legolandwindsor.com and someone came along
and tried to hold www.legoland-windsor.com up for ransom. In that case I would
be on TLC's side.
In this case they were not prudent and did not take appropriate action to
protect themselves from the start. Therefore I have no sympathy for them.
Unfortuately large companies have muscle and money hence a company can claim
they own the word "corinthians" and force a little guy to give it up. Why?
Because they have lawyers and money and the little guy doesn't. If the playing
field were level I think the little guy could have won the case for
"corinthians" but because it isn't the big companies can take almost anything
they want.
Granted if LEGO were going to protect itself to the extent of its "fair-play"
statement they would have to register every permutation of www.*lego*.* which
is obviously a practical imposibility. Nevertheless they should protect the
obvious when its appropriate which in this case they did not.
Eric Kingsley
The New England LEGO Users Group
http://www.nelug.org/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Anyone heard this story yet?
|
| (...) I wonder though; how can they be expected to police all misuse of their name in a case like this? If they copyright legolandwindsor.com, what's to prevent some knucklehead from using "legoland-windsor.com" or "legoland_windsor.com" or even (...) (24 years ago, 31-Aug-00, to lugnet.general)
|
37 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
