"Joe Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You are of course correct that trademarks are feild limited. However > my understanding is that the courts also tend to take into account the > likelyhood of confusion. [...] > Similarly if somebody tries to sell just about any product > using the current apple logo, they would likely > recive an injunction. [...]
If using the current Apple logo, I agree. However, many things sell using the general image of a bitten apple. For example, the Bite discount card for UK transport station food http://www.bitecard.co.uk I have no reason to suspect that its operator SSP has an Apple licence. The State Museum of Pennsylvania is using *a* swirl, not debian's particular swirl. What trademark could we hold that would cover the use of the State Museum of Pennsylvania? Puzzled, -- MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op. Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
