* John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Humberto Massa Guimarães writes: > > (*) I don't even know if US trademark law allows them to go that far... > > The notion that we would be infringing their trademark by failing to remove > strings that they put in is ludicrous. It's equivalent to Ford demanding > that I remove all the Ford logos before selling my truck.
Your analogy is flawed. My ford is still a ford.... if however I try to pass off my completely rebuilt car and tried to pass it off as ford. > > Basically, the only references that I found in BR case law were to > > *advertising* and *misrepresenting* something as being from the wrong > > origin. > > Same in the US. -- Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
