|
|
 | | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
| (...) In the same way that calling Lego brand building blocks "legos" is trademark dilution. In the same way that calling facial tissue "Kleenex" is. Well, not precisely the same, because those usages probably aren't negative, just dilutive, but (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
| Moved to off-topic.debate (...) Huh? Maybe there's some facet of trademark law I'm unfamiliar with, but how is *discussing* a product, even in negative terms, a trademark dilution? Are you seriously suggesting that saying something negative (even as (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
| (...) I've (...) I believe his characterization of IE would fall under (political) parody and is therefore fair use. The other possibility is that he meant it as fact, which he would be completely justified as claiming, even in court. I'm not sure (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Why do we know all of this? (was Re: evolution)
|
| (...) And, I must jump in, cause, well, I do, but if I remember my History of Anthropology course (if only I could find my notes!) it was actually Herbert Spencer (a wild and wacky social darwinist) coined that term. (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Why do we know all of this? (was Re: evolution)
|
| (...) Ack! >_<;; I took "The evolution of human nature" (aka intro to sociobiology) which the first third of the class focused on "real" evolution. Then in my "history of anthropology" (aka anthro theory) class, we started out with some of the (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
