Canadian Supreme Court Groks Trademarks
from the that's-good dept
How disappointing is it that we actually are excited when a court has understood the proper role of trademarks? There are already too many people trying to expand the purpose of trademarks (with occasional success), that it's good to see at least some courts recognize the true purpose of trademarks. Mikester writes in to let us know that the Canadian Supreme Court has ruled against two large trademark holders, Mattel for their Barbie trademark and champaign maker Veuve Cliquot, as both tried to stop the use of their trademarked names in totally unrelated businesses. It seems that so many trademark holders want to believe that a trademark gives them all rights to whatever they trademarked, rather than just the right to prevent confusion or misleading use of the trademark in specific areas. Perhaps we should stop thinking of trademarks as being intellectual property -- because they're not. Trademarks are really about consumer protection; keeping consumers from being tricked into believing something is associated with a company that it's not. When we call it intellectual property, people automatically jump to conclusions about the level of protection the law grants -- and that leads to numerous wasteful lawsuits.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060602.wscoc0602/GIStory/
Here's one decision:
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2006/2006scc22/2006scc22.html
Here is the other decision
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2006/2006scc23/2006scc23.html
A while back the court denied trademark protection for the design of Lego blocks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Way Off Topic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Way Off Topic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Way Off Topic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Way Off Topic
Atrocious, a-t-r-o-c-i-o-u-s
Thank you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Way Off Topic
(I'm not just off-topic, I'm driving drunk on the topic, veering off and back onto it with wild abandon; you just don't see that part because my headlights are blinding)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Way Off Topic
The etymology has to due with Martian Attitudes (in the context of the book, of course).
It is used for a high level of understanding. Heinlein's characters described it as becoming one with a concept or person or object, loving it and haint it with equal intensity (Sounds like Brad Pitt and Angelina Joile)
(I guess I have read the book too many times)
HTH
D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Way Off Topic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Off Topic and On Topic
Even though you're off topic, I'm glad you mentioned it. I grok.
To get back on topic:
Way to go for the Canadian Supreme Court!
Common sense seems to be running short these days when it comes to courtrooms - a notable exception is the Enron jury. Hopefully the appelate court will let the decision stand.
Now if we could get the Canadian Supreme Court to talk to the U.S. Supreme Court regarding their decision on Eminent Domain. (So much for staying on topic.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Off Topic and On Topic
It would not do much good. There is no constitutional protection in Canada for property rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Off Topic and On Topic
The few times I've been to Canada I've always been impressed with how people use common sense versus relying on lawmakers to solve problems.
Probably just a case of "the grass is always greener ..."
On the other hand, I'll take America's lower taxes and our Bill of Rights over anything else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Way Off Topic
(PS the book came long before the internet was even conceived - by Al Gore?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Way Off Topic
Starship Troopers was the first science fiction book I ever read (age fourteen) and I loved it and devoured science fiction for years after that. (I still read Keith Laumer) I went off Heinlein when I read Farnham's Freehold which I frankly thought was fascist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To Grok
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
protection for
Chapter 2 of Title 17 (copyright law- check out the link for the whole thing http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ )
Intellectual property comes into play where Inital Ownership is established. But this is to protect the creatives who make the trademarks (logo, wordmarks, etc).
For example, I create a logo for company X, who says they cant afford it. They then take my idea to another (cheeper) designer and have it recreated. In this case my idea is protected by Intellectual Property laws.
For more info check out
www.creativeprofessional.net
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lazarus -- can we PLEASE let the Al Gore urban legend die?
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
Claim: Vice-President Al Gore claimed that he "invented" the Internet.
Status: False.
Origins: Despite the derisive references that continue even today, Al Gore did not claim he "invented" the Internet, nor did he say anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way. The "Al Gore said he 'invented' the Internet" put-downs were misleading, out-of-context distortions of something he said during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN's "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Off topic: Al Gore
And I don't know if I'd classify it as an "Urban Legend."
Urban legends should be reserved for really important things such as Pop Rocks and Coca-Cola, not washed up politicians still trying desperately to hold onto their former glory.
Besides, it's a time honored tradition for politicians and the media to mislead and/or take things out of context as long as it fits into their agenda.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about the Apple case?
OT: Yes he was a good scientist and visionary like Clarke (who predicted/invented satellites) . Heinlein predicted nuclear weapons and the cold war in 1940 (Unsatisfactory Solution - I think)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re:Paul Pickthorne
[ link to this | view in chronology ]