Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
any good lawyer knows that is a bit of stretch to extend this ruling to that extreme.
you should be ashamed of yourself for making such a stupid declaration here.
point to a case where the person is using the trademark to sell fake bags (no fair use defense whatsoever) and trying extend it one that does have fair use defensive arguements is patently irresponsible.
Unless your trying to scam to pay you large sums of money to fight out that dog of a case
in which case good for you take advantage of all the idiots on this board.
|
Besides attacking me, please tell me why it is fundamentally flawed. You need to research reverse passing and false origin claims off under the Lanham Act. I believe that watermarking your content could protect content producers from tubes that publish their content with their TM logo on it. And if the tube site strips the watermark, it may only make their claim stronger.
The TM owner may also have a claim for false origin under the Lanham Act.
I am not saying its a guaranteed winner. What I said was it gives a content owner another weapon in the fight against piracy.
Seeing how your threads/posts seems to support piracy I didnt expect you to like the application of this decision to such actions though.
There is fair use when it comes to TMs but it is more limited than in copyright.
I also think it makes hosts here in the US and abroad more likely to police infringing sites.