Re: ADT yard signs

["Robertm" <Respond@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think ADT is already diluted. Who would actually want one of those signs?
I'd be ashamed to put one in front of my house.

Bob

"Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:xeX7f.61$9V6.112@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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
> ||
> ||
> ||
> |
> |
> |
>
>