Subject:
|
testing--to see why my message got butchered
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.test
|
Date:
|
Wed, 22 Mar 2000 01:01:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
163 times
|
| |
|
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Salm <kdsalm@dreamscape.com>
Newsgroups: lugnet.market.theory
Date: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: The Nugator Company for Sale ???
> > Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> >
> > > I already have pieniazek.org and another domain the name of which will
> > > be revealed later.
> >
> > You too, huh? I have one already, which I will reveal hopefully in a
> > couple of weeks. (It is a big project I have been working on since
> > November, my schedule has been so screwed up lately, but after I get
> > married in May, I will be able to stay at home during weekends, yea! :)
> > )
> >
> > > What would I need with legoland.cc? No way would I be able to hold on to
> > > it, or if I could, Lego would surely not pay .5M for it. This person is
> > > a fool. The number of domains that have changed hands in this price
> > > range is well less than 1000. Well WELL less.
> >
> > Do you think TLG is going to go after this person? I would think so.
>
>
>
> At the risk of getting torched, I would like to inject a few thoughts here.
>
> Disclaimer: I know nothing of law, internet law, trademark law, not even
> traffic laws. I even have been known to have limited thought processes.
>
> First, the four letter word spelled L E G O is simply a combination of
> letters that any number of people could have thought of. I do not know if it
> can be called a word. While this does make the commercial use of these
> letters more unique, it is still just a bunch of letters.
>
> I know people with the last name Lego; they happen to be 100% Anglo-Saxon.
> They do not know where this name originates.
>
> If I wanted to start a business doing who knows what--perhaps trash hauling or
> flower arranging or sell used cars, there should be no problem with me using
> the word Lego as the name of my enterprise. If my enterprise has nothing to
> do with children's toys make of plastic, then everything should be just fine. • I do not think that
> The Lego Company would have any recourse. Trademark dilution would not be an
> issue at all as my products or services are totally unrelated to little • plastic bits.
>
>
> Here are some genuine examples of why I believe this:
>
> 1. Hershey Chocolate Company has absolutely no affiliation with Hershey Ice
> Cream company, yet both companies use the name Hershey.
>
> 2. Ford is a name used by an automobile manufacturer; it is also the name of
> a company that sells chewing gum in little gum ball machines in various • places.
>
> 3. Until his death, my NY state senator was Mr. William Sears. Sears and
> Roebuck attempted to stop him from campaigning using his name--they lost the
> legal battle.
>
> 4. In 1946, the famous Marx Brothers released a film titled "Casablanca"
> Warner Brothers Pictures filed suit against the Marx Brothers since a film by
> the name "Casablanca" already existed--released by Warner Brothers. It was
> such a frivolous lawsuit
> that the Marx Brothers brought counter suit against Warner Bros. for using the
> word Brothers in their name. This did not make it to trial (I don't think).
>
> So, while I enjoy the products of TLC as much as everyone else here, the use
> of the word Lego and LEGOLAND is not so sacrosanct that no one else can use it
> privately or commercially. As long as it is not used for anything similar to
> TLC, there may not be any legal leg for our beloved TLC to stand on.
>
>
> since I am probably wrong on several points:
> go to lugnet.off-topic.debate to argue this further
>
> FUT: lugent.off-topic.debate
>
> _______________________________________________________
>
> Kevin Salm
> ....The biggest fan of the Gray Lego brick....
> _______________________________________________________
> ....build every day for maximum satisfaction....
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: testing--to see why my message got butchered
|
| well, I guess that this message did not get butchered like it did here: (URL) thing wrong I see here is that line wrapping seems to be at odd places. ------- Kevin Salm wrote in message ... (...) to (...) here. (...) it (...) hauling or (...) using (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
