Subject:
|
Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 10 Mar 2000 07:21:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
689 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Joslin writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Todd Lehman wrote:
> > > Excellent! I didn't know Internet Exploiter had that. Here's one thing
> > > I've been experimenting with in Netscrape Navigator...
> > You know, I know you don't like these tools. But they *are* trademarked
> > names, and I feel you're diluting the trademark when you make fun of
> > them. You seem to do it just about every time too. Just something to
> > ponder.
>
> 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?
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 there it is.
> Are you seriously suggesting that saying something negative (even as in a
> parody) is somehow illegal? How is a review, even if contained to a two-word
> succint phrase, a trademark dilution?
>
> I would think a Libertarian would be a lot less quick to try to deny someone
> the right to their fair say. ;D
>
> And no, I don't think there's a parallel. Now, if Todd were making fun of
> your product, and basically letting people know he doesn't like it, *then*
> there's be a parallel... and I don't think that would be illegal (let's keep
> in mind that I can't keep Larry's employers straight, so I have no idea who he
> works for now vs who he's going to be working for in two weeks, so I have no
> idea what it is his company makes).
Actually, I think there is a parallel, although it's probably somewhere around
the 50,000 foot level. Parallel being that Todd owns trademarks, so should
respect other trademarks, or not expect his to be respected. I think it's a
pretty weak parallel, but it's there.
Dunno. Could be trademark dilution, could be free expression, could well be
both. Not really somewhere I'm interested in going, but I did want to point
out that trademark dilution happens, and mostly through casual conversational
use.
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
I'm getting paid for this --> alladvantage.com
Sign up via me, the reference $$ go to fund Lugnet.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
63 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
