Dilwyn Jones wrote:
> >Most of all, it would look perfect even on 1982's QL ! :-)
>
> 1982? I thought the QL came out in 1983/84???
>
Maybe, but if it were came out in 1982 it would still look perfect ;-)
>
> >Worries about legal issues are exagerrated. Whatever used as a logo,
> it will be
> >similar to some other logo.
>
> Well, a company that size could and may well get irate over it, as
> Geoff Wicks pointed out. My wife works for an outdoor
> clothing/equipment company called Gelert. Their logo is a kind of
> squashed G. Looked general enough to avoid trouble to me...until
> 'George at Asda' (some designer clothes company) who also used a G as
> a logo (never actually seen it). Guess that meant they had to sort out
> who owned rights to the letter G and so now we are all not allowed to
> write capital G's? (says he with great sarcasm). The problem seems to
> be on the commercial side. Individuals making up T-shirts at no or
> little profit should escape hassle, but traders making them for a
> profit (no matter how small) may well run into trouble.
>
At my previous company we have registered trademark. We have published
magazine
about electronics and being the first in the hood we didn't want to
enable any newcomer to
take our appearance and carry on. It turns outr that we could only
register exact appearance
of the name on the cover. It was slovenian translation of Electronics
World, written at a certain font in ceratin size
with planet like saturn orbiting aorund it. Theoratically, anyone could
use different planet, maybe a slightly different expresion like "World of
electronics" or maybe a different planet. It was more cosmetics than real
protection.
But it has suited us, since we could pretend that we had something so
valuable that we had to protect it by any means ;o)
Regards,
Branko
