Subject:
|
Re: Trademarks & Copyrights (Swimming pools & movie stars)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands
|
Date:
|
Wed, 30 Jan 2002 01:44:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
978 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.theory, Richard Marchetti writes:
> In lugnet.market.theory, Matthew Gerber writes:
> > In lugnet.market.theory, William R. Ward writes:
> > > But I don't
> > > think "Bricksmith" is. Only "Guild of Bricksmiths." If the GoB wants
> > > to prevent other people from using the term "Bricksmith" they should
> > > assert a trademark for that as well.
> >
> > Good point (though not really part of the original issue)...and something
> > GoB might want to consider if it becomes important to them.
>
> This whole thread is completely psychotic. "Bricksmith" and "bricksmiths"
> are actual words being used in the vernacular -- I am not sure anyone can
> claim exclusive use of words that are used commonly by others.
Windows.
> Maybe I'm wrong, but I bet the trademarked or registered term is "Apple
> Computers, Inc." or some such thing, and not just the word "apple"...
Apple Records went after them based on the word alone.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Veering slightly off-thread...
>
> For me, The GOB, and/or anything to do with it, is one of the things I
> dislike intensely about lugnet. If the GOB doesn't smack potently of a
> little clique in our midst then I don't know what would qualify around here.
> I don't like anything about the GOB. If the name GOB wasn't so funny, it
> would almost be offensively self-congratulatory -- maybe it's both!
There's something wrong with a group of builders banding together to create
guidelines for the creation and marketing of quality MOC kits? I think it
was a clever thing to do, and it lends a certain credibility to their
products. Certainly The LEGO Company seems to think so! Ask Daniel
Siskind...remember, they approached him...
> Outside
> of some brief market postings, and possibly brief discussions (which this
> thread has moved way beyond) I think GOB discussions should be moved to
> Off-topic to give other posters an opportunity to express something that
> might be of interest to someone beyond Larry P, et al.
>
> GOB MOC kits are no more officially Lego designs than any other clone kit
> designs, except that the brick quality is slightly better...
That's not the point, now is it?
While you have a certain argument for the whole clone thing, I think that
you are either truly or intentionally missing that point...
Is it the banding together thing that bothers you? Because there are several
folks doing the MOC thing on their own (see where this thread started)...do
you begrudge them selling their designs privately or at eBay or whatever?
These folks have their designs under copyright. Some even have web sites,
with names that they claim trademark over. Does the fact that they are doing
things on their own rather than under a group name make them better in your
estimation?
Is it the assertation of the trademark claimed on the name that bothers you?
Because, in this instance, I think it's different from just registering a
domain name and running with it...GoB has built a reputation for quality
work that they feel strongly about protecting.
I don't know if you're just being your usual angry self, or if there is
something more to this particular "Hopping Mad Rant™" beneath the
surface...but I think you are confusing a clique with a solid business
concept...
Matt
(I guess I'll leave this here, because I have NO CLUE where this stinkin'
thread belongs anymore...SHEESH! Go ahead and FUT wherever the heck you want...)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
61 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
