Re: ADT yard signs

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Not only that but ADT could argue dilution of a famous mark.


"Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:CYW7f.59$9V6.29@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Seeing as though Burma Shave closed operations in 1967...dunno.
|
| I'm thinking that if you gain some kind of benefit out of using someone
| else's trademark, that it is infringement.
|
| "Robertm" <Respond@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| news:djpa4q$85kj$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
||
|| "Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
|| news:JaV7f.86$z15.6076@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|| > You're the one infringing on a trademark not me, I have no reason to
| call
|| > ADT.
|| >
|| > According to your logic it would be ok to put a Rolls Royce insigna on
a
|| > Volkswagon...sure you may never get sued but it's still not kosher.
| Also,
|| > anyone selling someone else's trademark is infringing.
|| >
||
|| With ADT's reputation being what it is, maybe it's more like putting a VW
|| insignia on a Rolls Royce.  Regarding trademak infringement, if I
| purchased
|| a complete system from them folks and owned it, I don't think it's
|| infringement to sell the parts separately, as long as I don't manufacture
|| copies of their signs or labels and sell them for profit. Several years
| ago
|| I bought some Burma Shave signs and stuck them up. They were legally
|| produced and I purchased them to use on my property even though I didn't
|| sell Burma Shave. Illegal? No way.
||
|| Bob
||
||
||
|
|
|