General Discussion : 22212


General / 22212	22211 \| 22213

Subject:	Brand Name Sovereignty
Newsgroups:	lugnet.general
Date:	Mon, 18 Sep 2000 18:00:10 GMT
Viewed:	562 times

We've all seen the lengths to which TLC is willing to go in order to protect its intellectual property, and that's certainly understandable. What about such things as: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=438584654 and http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=437740196 For that matter, The Learning Channel has been aka TLC for at least six or seven years--why is no fuss made about that? I can understand that an abbreviation might not be eligible for copyright, but "Lego" seems to be. Is it because the products are notably dissimilar? Dave!

Message has 3 Replies:

		Re: Brand Name Sovereignty
(...) It could be, but also keep in mind that LEGO doesn't call itself "TLC" -- they call themselves "The LEGO Company" or just "LEGO". Only us fans use the label "TLC" as an abbreviation (earlier "TLG"). --Todd (25 years ago, 18-Sep-00, to lugnet.general)

		Re: Brand Name Sovereignty
(...) Yep, trademarks are held for specific product categories. Abbreviations are harder to protect (though IBM has gone to efforts to protect that particular abbreviation, and I have heard rumors that IBM tried to trademark I, B, and M - wouldn't (...) (25 years ago, 18-Sep-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

		Re: Brand Name Sovereignty
I believe the pottery company has been around in Japan at least as long as TLC has been doing toys in Denmark. Paul Sinasohn (...) (25 years ago, 20-Sep-00, to lugnet.general)

6 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search