Jonathan Baker-Bates wrote:
What is the effect of registering something like Peter Rabbit as a trade
mark instead of having it protected by copyright?
- Control is perpetual.
- Control extends to any use of the character, not just a single
instance as with copyright.
- You have to use the trademark in order to keep it (IIRC, IANAL)
It strikes me that by registering this in as many categories as they can
think of, Sue, Grabbit & Runne have found a way to make sure Britain's
heritage keeps making them money, even after the original work falls
into the public domain:
http://tinyurl.com/2pouf8
That seems to be a bizarre misunderstanding of trademark law. Peter is
not a trademark for (for example) dishes and bowls, he is a trademark
that can be placed on (for example) dishes and bowls.
Unless I'm the one misunderstanding. IANAL.
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
fc-uk-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/fc-uk-discuss
