|
|
| Re: [Long] MTA Trademarks (825482) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 5 |
||
|
| (826149) | |
Re: [Long] MTA Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 10:21:45 2009, in response to Re: [Long] MTA Trademarks, posted by R36 #9346 on Wed Aug 26 09:03:26 2009. Then try all the bus depot addresses... |
|
|
| (826152) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 10:25:48 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by bmtlines on Wed Aug 26 10:13:15 2009. You reminded me of this song (warning: MP3, NSFW, NSF crappy internet connections). |
|
|
| (826188) | |
So sue the Unicode Consortium Re: [Long] MTA Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 11:35:26 2009, in response to [Long] MTA Trademarks, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Aug 25 23:48:52 2009. ➊➋➍➏➐ |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (826198) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 11:41:51 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Wed Aug 26 08:50:09 2009. No-one can trademark a generic letter in a circle. What makes it unique to the MTA IS the color combination.And that is absurd. I'm going to register Unicode character U+0024 in black on a white background as my trade mark and then send cease-and-desist letters to every bank, newspaper, and Fortune 500 company. |
|
|
| (826199) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 11:44:54 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by arnine on Wed Aug 26 08:49:44 2009. Exactly. This bozo has too much time on his hands. He needs to either be let go for lack of work or be told to find real legal issues.Is it possible to indict him for barratry in New York? |
|
|
| (826214) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Thu Aug 27 11:57:03 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 11:44:54 2009. Good question. But, he is wrong but would have to be wrong in each case he brings, that can be hard to prove. |
|
|
| (826215) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 11:57:51 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Wed Aug 26 16:26:38 2009. I'm waiting for the rollsign for the Ⓡ® train... |
|
|
| (826239) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 12:26:17 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by arnine on Thu Aug 27 11:57:03 2009. Good question. But, he is wrong but would have to be wrong in each case he brings, that can be hard to prove.I'm sure it would be possible to compile a list of vexatious trademark letters he has sent. |
|
|
| (826242) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Thu Aug 27 12:33:39 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Aug 27 12:26:17 2009. True. I will look into that when I get a moment. |
|
|
| (826249) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Thu Aug 27 12:49:54 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Wed Aug 26 16:26:38 2009. Xerox has bought ads that say "you cannot 'xerox' a document, but you can copy it on a Xerox Brand copying machine"Xerox" is the brand name and I can fully understand their trademark as I can understand (but not necessarily agree with) the MTA trademark of its "MTA New York City Transit" Logo. However trademarking the route bullets is like Xerox trademarking the word "Print" on its copy machines or the symbol for the on/off switch. |
|
|
| (826251) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Thu Aug 27 12:52:53 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by randyo on Thu Aug 27 01:21:27 2009. Who would be the plaintiffs in this scenario? |
|
|
| (826255) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Thu Aug 27 13:00:44 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by randyo on Thu Aug 27 01:21:27 2009. That can be true depends on individual judge |
|
|
| (826256) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Aug 27 13:02:31 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Thu Aug 27 12:52:53 2009. MTA. |
|
|
| (829167) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 01:04:38 2009, in response to NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Tue Aug 25 19:15:27 2009. This issue has been getting press coverage in San Francisco and the New York MTA is now backpedaling:in a recent phone interview, a spokesman for the agency, Aaron Donovan, seemed to backtrack: "We have no claim on Muni's icons, we would need to look into the specifics of this case in greater detail to determine why the letter may have been sent," he said. "The images on Mr. Moore's blog did not appear to show anything that would represent a trademark violation against the New York MTA." So to those defenders of the MTA that claim that New York's MTA can lay claim to any letter or number in a circle - well even the MTA backtracked when having to explain it to the press!!! |
|
|
| (829174) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by terrapin station on Fri Sep 4 01:28:34 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 01:04:38 2009. nice, total metropod pwnage!!!!!!! |
|
|
| (829176) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 01:33:17 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 01:04:38 2009. the man's a spokesman, not a lawyer. |
|
|
| (829184) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Sep 4 03:48:18 2009, in response to NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Tue Aug 25 19:15:27 2009. As long as the MTA brought it up, the letter or symbol in a circle actually should belong to the M & M candy Co. since the original circles with the "m" logo were used by M & M candy originally for its loose candy sold in candy stores and later applied to all the M & M candy including those sold in packages. If any entity has trademark or copyrights it is M & M and NOT the MTA!!! Can you say "countersuit?" |
|
|
| (829185) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by terrapin station on Fri Sep 4 03:58:10 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by randyo on Fri Sep 4 03:48:18 2009. what the mta has trademarked is there listed the database, metropods ramblings notwithstanding. the gov't approved mta's trademarks. don't think mars corp has a role here. |
|
|
| (829197) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 06:25:46 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 01:33:17 2009. Spokesnan for NY MTA feeds their info by MTA Legal so this spokesman is correct. This I know as I have on a couple of occasions had the chance of chatting with a few MTA spokesmen when I did a college report on business communications. The article is accurate. Why can't you just man up and admit your wrong? It was obvious to many you were wrong before the article. You never did post something to confirm what you said. You did post one legal section, but it did not really apply. |
|
|
| (829198) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 06:28:52 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 01:04:38 2009. I am so happy. NY MTA better watch out, they cannot bully small guys around. It is funny because when I sent my e-mails to different press outlets in both NY & SF I did mention that I thought they were being so aggressive because they didn't want the TM's business hurt. Which, to be honest, I understand, but I doubt it would have much impact on the TM sales as most of it comes from tourism, railfans and NYC residents from what I see in figures they have released previously. |
|
|
| (829214) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 07:53:52 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 01:33:17 2009. You really are a die-hard apologist for the MTA aren't you... Well they look like crap across the country right now for doing this.They have to be careful or they may end up losing it all - lawyers with other opinions are starting to notice and sooner or later one will take on a case. |
|
|
| (829226) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 08:08:14 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 06:28:52 2009. What I object to is their attempt to stop people from using photographs of the subway on calendars, postcards, etc if the pictures include the route bullet in the background. In that case it is not as if you are selling a stylized route bullet on a t-shirt or other trinket. The route bullet is merely part of the background of your scene.The courts decided in Rock & Roll Hall of Fame & Museum v. Gentile Prods that a photographer can sell pictures of a trademarked building - this could very well be extended by the courts to include MTA rolling stock which they seem to imply on their site that it is their intellectual property Much of what they appear to be laying claim to is in the public domain either by having been created prior to 1923 and/or other legal reasons. They can take their route symbols and shove them where the sun don't shine but they should not interfere with the use of photographs - past and present. |
|
|
| (829229) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 08:22:25 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 07:53:52 2009. Exactly. Notice that a lot of these issues started once the TM got it's retail arm better organized and business-like that is just my observation and that I can be wrong about |
|
|
| (829231) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 08:34:12 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 08:08:14 2009. No, I agree totally. Quite frankly, IMHO agencies in any area should not be able to trademark anything except maybe their logo, but even that should be allowed. They are mainly public agencies, but if it will be allowed they need to be cautious and sensible in how or when they enforce it. But, I am happy to see they are backtracking on going after the guy in SF.:) |
|
|
| (829232) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 08:35:13 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 08:22:25 2009. I think you do have a point. Probably the success of the TM in selling t-shirts and other trinkets gave the MTA the idea that they could make money off of their logos and such. I don't begrudge them entirely but they are definitely being overly aggressive and are cutting their own noses to spite their face. Then there is the issue of how much of the licensing money as opposed to gift shop sales is actually going to support the TM and how much is going to the black hole better known as the general fund of the MTA.Largely because of this issue I am sending the TM a "Cease and Desist" order to force them to remove my name from their wall (list of Charter Members). I wonder how they will like a dose of their own medicine! |
|
|
| (829234) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 08:42:31 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 08:35:13 2009. Yeah, I mean I never really heard much about the MTA being overly agressive on filing claims until the TM's retail operations grew into what it is today. I do not begrudge them either in their wanting to merchandise their stuff, but there is a point you have to say "okay that's enough".It would be interesting to see how they react to the cease and desist order. |
|
|
| (829292) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Sep 4 12:06:50 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 01:04:38 2009. So to those defenders of the MTA that claim that New York's MTA can lay claim to any letter or number in a circleI don't think anyone said that. |
|
|
| (829305) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 12:23:24 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Sep 4 12:06:50 2009. Actually yes there was one poster who has (and still will not admit he is wrong) if you go through the thread you'll find it |
|
|
| (829317) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:34:06 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 07:53:52 2009. No, I just happen to think the have a case. you belive that spokesman, yet we know of another who has done nothing but lie to the TV networks. |
|
|
| (829323) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:38:16 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 08:08:14 2009. you're still getting trademarks confused with copyrights. again, there is a diffrence, which seems to be what you guys are not getting. |
|
|
| (829326) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:43:05 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by randyo on Fri Sep 4 03:48:18 2009. Mars co has a trade mark on an M on a round candy becase they use it as the logo of M&Ms. a trademark is a mark used in one's businesses to idenitfy their product or service. in any other context outside of food and M&Ms related products, Mars would have no standing becuase they are not engaged in that business. |
|
|
| (829329) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:45:16 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Sep 4 12:06:50 2009. I have, becuase they can if they use it. and they can complain if someone starts selling something similar if they feel a threat to thier right to do business. |
|
|
| (829331) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Sep 4 12:46:14 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Sep 4 12:06:50 2009. Wrong again, Chris.You can't get hired soon enough, the way I see it. |
|
|
| (829333) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Sep 4 12:48:14 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:43:05 2009. wrong. M&Ms are on t-shirts. M&M logos are on t-shirts just like NY MTA subway route bullets are on t-shirts. EQUAL. SAME. Both could conceivably trademark their logo for use on clothing, it would seem. |
|
|
| (829336) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:51:48 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 06:25:46 2009. every post you and BMTlines have made in this thread is based around inncorect assumtions on what laws apply in this case and in general to MTA intelectual property. You have no clue what you are talking about. you keep confusing copyright with trade mark. they are two completly diffrent animals. |
|
|
| (829344) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 13:11:48 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:51:48 2009. Yes, they are different animals. They cannot trademark what you are saying they can. It has been proven here several times by links posted by BMTLines look @ TESS so far you only posted ainformation that wasn't relevant. By the way, if we are wrong, then why is the MTA backing down when they are right? I'll tell you why, because they realized they are wrong and I bet the lawyer from NY MTA who started this is probably in trouble. So, either MAN UP and admit that your wrong or post something that proves otherwise, in other words PUT UP OR STFU! |
|
|
| (829356) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 13:43:11 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:34:06 2009. Keep believing it - right now the MTA is losing in the court of public opinion and I am doing everything in my power to help that happen !!As for the MTA spokesman - are you saying he made that comment without approval from the MTA? The MTA is now on record as having said that they cannot control how people use the San Francisco bullets - anything their spokesman says can and WILL be used against them!! |
|
|
| (829357) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 13:47:16 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 13:43:11 2009. Exactly. The spokesman/spokeswoman @ any MTA agency has to run their statements by MTA legal ahead of time. |
|
|
| (829358) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 13:47:33 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:38:16 2009. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame case was a TRADEMARK dispute and guess what - The Photographer WON!!!!!!As for the rest - the MTA seems to be confusing them too especially when it asserts that it owns the copyrights to pictures in its collection that are clearly in the public domain. |
|
|
| (829372) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 17:44:18 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:43:05 2009. Mars would have no standing becuase they are not engaged in that business.By that logic MTA should have had no standing against the bagel shop. After all they are not in the retail food business! |
|
|
| (829382) | |
YO! MTA LAWYERS! (Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Sep 4 18:20:13 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by randyo on Fri Sep 4 03:48:18 2009. Heh. This oughta ruin the weekend for them corksoakers!
|
|
|
| (829383) | |
Re: YO! MTA LAWYERS! (Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks) |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 18:26:02 2009, in response to YO! MTA LAWYERS! (Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks), posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Sep 4 18:20:13 2009. I would love to see them try and take on M&M :) |
|
|
| (829384) | |
Re: YO! MTA LAWYERS! (Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Sep 4 18:31:35 2009, in response to Re: YO! MTA LAWYERS! (Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks), posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 18:26:02 2009. And some of the letters match the colors ... oh, the humanity! :) |
|
|
| (829401) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Sep 4 19:41:56 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 17:44:18 2009. IAWTP. Not only that, but by that same logic, the MTA would have no standing against a photog selling postcards since the MTA's principal business is transportation, NOT selling postcards or photographs. |
|
|
| (829416) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Subterranean Railway on Fri Sep 4 20:17:10 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 12:43:05 2009. According to Subchapter I, § 1052, of the Lanham Act, a trademark "which resembles . . . a mark or trade name previously used . . . by another [which will] likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, cause confusion, mistake, or deception . . . to result from the continued use by more than one person of the same or similar marks . . . " shall be infringing.To go back to your example, M&M-shaped dolls could easily be confused with actual Mars Inc. merchandise, and would constitute infringement, whereas M&M Computers probably would not.   As an extreme example, I could start a textiles company called Micro Soft Fibers and probably not infringe on the software giant's trademark. However, I certainly could not appropriate Microsoft's logo for my own company. |
|
|
| (829485) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 23:30:53 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Sep 4 12:48:14 2009. Not equal. not the same if you can't look at a shirt and tell the diffrence between an M&M logo and a subway bullet, then you're an idiot. |
|
|
| (829487) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 23:35:47 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 13:43:11 2009. the MTA, thanks to one of thier other spokesmen, is also on record saying that a train car that belonged to FDR is on a siding under GCT, something that is NOT true at all. people like him are hired to do damage control. double talk and that kind of shit is a job requirement. |
|
|
| (829488) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 23:37:36 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by arnine on Fri Sep 4 13:11:48 2009. FUCK YOU I've studied the law, they are only backing off becuase of bad press. |
|
|
| (829491) | |
Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Sep 4 23:43:45 2009, in response to Re: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 23:30:53 2009. What is a trademark or service mark?* A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others. * A service mark is the same as a trademark, except that it identifies and distinguishes the source of a service rather than a product. Throughout this booklet, the terms "trademark" and "mark" refer to both trademarks and service marks. Do Trademarks, Copyrights and Patents protect the same things? No. Trademarks, copyrights and patents all differ. A copyright protects an original artistic or literary work; a patent protects an invention. For copyright information, go to http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/. For patent information, go to http://www.uspto.gov/main/patents.htm. |
|
|
| (829493) | |
Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 4 23:48:12 2009, in response to Re: UPDATE: NY MTA Claims SFMTA Parody Infringes on Trademarks, posted by metropod on Fri Sep 4 23:35:47 2009. But in that case the MTA spokesman was not speaking for or obligating another department of the agency. In this case he was the mouthpiece of the legal department. Big difference!Those comments will be heard in court IF this case were to take that route. As for the difference between trademark and copyright - believe me I know the difference and what I have been saying is that the MTA is abusing both. They are abusing trademark when they interfere with photographers who sell pictures of trains just because the route symbol is in the background and they abuse copyright when the Transit Museum claims to own the copyright to pictures in its collection even though prints of the same pictures have been in other collections as well for years! |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 5 |
||
