On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Kevin Driscoll wrote: > Yes! It's absolutely critical to examine this distinction (if indeed, > there is a distinction to be found.) > > Stranger still, if you take the Register's account, the TV-Links > arrest is based on trademark law! > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/23/tv_links_trademark_law/
I am not a laywer, nor do I impersonate them on mailing lists, but wouldn't it only be a trademark violation if they using the trademarked name of a TV show to link to video file that was *not* the TV show in question? That is to say, if the abuser of the mark were misleading consumers using the mark? I eagerly await corrections, slap-downs, and shocked stares from those on this list who actually know law. -- Asheesh. -- Usage: fortune -P [] -a [xsz] [Q: [file]] [rKe9] -v6[+] dataspec ... inputdir _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
