Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker
There is a difference between sex and hardsex right? Following that line of reasoning one isn't infringing on another. It's like cheese. If someone owns the rights to American cheese, does he own the right to cheddar too? Because you can't own the right to "cheese" because it's too popular. Following that line of reasoning sex tube compared to hardsex tube is comparing American and cheddar. Both can exist in the same medium. This won't go far, but let the tubes "duke"  it out. |
your analogy is wrong - hardsex isn't a term on its own - taking 'cheese' as the generic common word and making an analogy to this debate here - if there was a cheese store called 'CheeseHouse.com' with a trademark on it somebody who registered 'CheddarCheeseHouse.com' would be infringing on it.
trademarks and patents are given out too easily and create messes like this. I think YouTube.com has an issue with anybody who runs a video site similar in style to theirs with a domain that includes the word 'tube'. Trademarks also have a lot to do with when you put the trademark into actual use/commerce and what the use is. Just because you registered a trademark before somebody else doesn't mean you aren't infringing - Shap admits that Sextube.com was registered before YouTube became what it is. Tube has a tv/video connotation - it was probably registered as a potential paysite name or MGP.
who knows - it's harder to feel sorry for this guy because from what people are saying he's running an illegal content style tube site.