Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sabriel" data-source="post: 5082979" data-attributes="member: 20348">Wow. Long thread. But interesting.I used to think that unlike copyright and patent law (for which IMO the scales are in the middle of tipping over), trademark law was still a case of the Good outweighing the Evil. Now... I'm not so sure. At least, threads like this indicate the laws and precedents thereof are, or are becoming, onerous.Do I understand correctly that - whereas the trademarks &quot;X's Foo&quot; and &quot;Y's Foo&quot; might happily coexist(?) - if X instead trademarks simply &quot;Foo&quot;, Y cannot use &quot;Y's Foo&quot; to sell their own product? Thus Army Builder / Y's Army Builder, likewise Hot Apple Sauce / Y's Hot Apple Sauce... and so on?The short fiction story <a href="http://www.spiderrobinson.com/melancholyelephants.html" target="_blank">&quot;Melancholy Elephants&quot;</a> weighs upon me; I am concerned that its analysis of copyright also covers trademarks (perhaps all &quot;IP&quot;). I note that language, like music, has practical combinatorial limits, and trademarks already have terms that can extend indefinitely.The consequences of our laws are not always apparent on their enactment. We must from time to time look upon our actions and our capabilities, and decide if they are still appropriate for our future; merely because &quot;the law&quot; allows us to do something, does not mean we should.It can come back and bite us in places Grandma would not approve.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sabriel, post: 5082979, member: 20348"] Wow. Long thread. But interesting. I used to think that unlike copyright and patent law (for which IMO the scales are in the middle of tipping over), trademark law was still a case of the Good outweighing the Evil. Now... I'm not so sure. At least, threads like this indicate the laws and precedents thereof are, or are becoming, onerous. Do I understand correctly that - whereas the trademarks "X's Foo" and "Y's Foo" might happily coexist(?) - if X instead trademarks simply "Foo", Y cannot use "Y's Foo" to sell their own product? Thus Army Builder / Y's Army Builder, likewise Hot Apple Sauce / Y's Hot Apple Sauce... and so on? The short fiction story [URL="http://www.spiderrobinson.com/melancholyelephants.html"]"Melancholy Elephants"[/URL] weighs upon me; I am concerned that its analysis of copyright also covers trademarks (perhaps all "IP"). I note that language, like music, has practical combinatorial limits, and trademarks already have terms that can extend indefinitely. The consequences of our laws are not always apparent on their enactment. We must from time to time look upon our actions and our capabilities, and decide if they are still appropriate for our future; merely because "the law" allows us to do something, does not mean we should. It can come back and bite us in places Grandma would not approve. [/QUOTE]

Verification