Subject:
|
Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2003 18:02:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
610 times
|
| |
|
|
John wrote:
> > Is there a right to free speech in Legoland?
>
> What about TLC's rights? You know, there are laws against publically speaking
> lies about people-- speech really isn't "free". You have the right not to have
> your name publically impuned by someone else. TLC has the right not to have
> their trademarks (for which they paid handsomely) impuned by others. In the
> case of the BT, BPS is using a specific trademark of TLC-- it is an open and
> shut case.
>
> In the case presented by Dave! the issue isn't so clear. A large sculpture of
> purely bricks could possibly *not* be LEGO (rather a clone) and so their case
> may be more tenuous.
>
> In that case they'd probably resort to Plan B-- sue you anyway and lawyer you
> to death;-)
There is a tricky situation here with respect to trademarks I think. If
I say "I have built a pornographic mosaic using LEGO bricks." I am
simply making a statement of fact. I should even be able to advertise
this fact (since it is an accurate description of what I have created,
and even a relevant part of the description). I should even be able to
say LEGO donated the bricks if they had. What I should not be able to
imply is that LEGO endorses my creation (unless they have). Of course,
because of this, TLC should be careful who they give bricks to, or at
least make a stipulation of how the trademark may be used in reference
(if TLC donates the bricks under a contract that says you can't reveal
their donation, then so long as you aren't required by law to reveal the
donor, then you should be held to that contract).
It's clear that people must be able to make statements of fact about the
brands of things they own or are selling (for example, I don't think the
DMV would accept you registering your Ford Explorer as a "SUV"). Of
course if one thinks carefully about what trademark is protecting, there
is no problem. Trademark is protecting LEGO and Ford from having other
manufacturers bill their products as LEGO or Ford. So long as it is
clear in an advertisement that the use of the trademark refers to the
companies product and doesn't try and claim something else as the
companies product, you should be fine.
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
| (...) I'm glad you put a winky there-- that is one of my hot buttons-- "artists" hiding behind the First Amendment while they purvey filth and obscenity-- and then *I* have to support it! (NEA in the US) (...) What about TLC's rights? You know, (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
39 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
