Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 22:24:59 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Curt Sampson <cjs@portal.ca> Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: General policy on trademark violations Message-ID: <19980213222459.24281@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96.980213111311.27727K-100000@cynic.portal.ca>; from Curt Sampson on Fri, Feb 13, 1998 at 11:15:17AM -0800 References: <199802130737.IAA01675@sos.freebsd.dk> <Pine.NEB.3.96.980213111311.27727K-100000@cynic.portal.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 13, 1998 at 11:15:17AM -0800, Curt Sampson wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Feb 1998, Søren Schmidt wrote:
[... on trademarks ...]
> > This is just some lawyers trying to make $$, when it gets clear to
> > them that there is NONE, they will find other things to persue
> > pretty quickly.
>
> You don't appear to have any understanding of trademark law
> whatsoever. Money is not the issue here. If a trademark owner
> discovers someone wrongly using his trademark and he does not take
> action to stop it, he risks loosing the trademark. Thus, a trademark
> owner is basically obliged to ask misusers to desist, and even sue
> them if they refuse.
>
> If you don't like this state of things, you should be trying to
> change US trademark law, not blaming the trademark owner, who is
> simply doing what trademark law insists that he do.
If they'd wanted to avoid the problem and do a public relations coup,
they should have offered to sell a license for a symbolic sum ('an
undisclosed sum' as they tend to call such things :-)
They could still sue anybody else that is in violation, without
negative precedence.
So the blame lies IMHO squarely with Hasbro, or Hasbros lawyer (for
not thinking of this possibility).
Eivind.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980213222459.24281>