[Feedback] Amarok und WOW

[steven robinson]

The Apple case was about breach of contract between the two parties over an
out of court settlement. Strictly speaking, the rights regarding how the
word apple could be reserved regarding the actual copyright was never
tested, it was merely the adherence to a contract that was on trial. The
outcome may have been entirely different if the initial contract between the
two companies had never been drawn up.
The case between MS and Lindows showed the difficulty in the use of generic
words in a copyright too. The comments from the judge (which were basically,
"you want to stop anybody using the word windows or any word that sounds
like it??") prompted MS to settle out of court with a very large settlement
because it was blatantly obvious that they couldn't win. And that was a case
about a product that was in direct competition with the plaintiff.
Enforcing copyrights on generic words is not as easy as many people believe.
These things have to be tested in court on a case by case basis. To take it
to the absurd extreme; if GM called one of their models "Sedan" they
couldn't stop every other car manufacturer from using the term from that
point onwards. They'd be laughed out of court.
However, copyrighting a generic word and then preventing somebody for using
that word in its original context is pretty clear cut. If it was ever
allowed, we would end up with the absurd situation where you'd have to be
scared of being sued every time you said or wrote anything. It would spell
the end of communications as we know it. Nobody would be able to write books
about mustangs without the fear of being sued by Ford. It's simply an
untennable situation that no court in the world could abide. Even if amarok
was a registered trademark, that wouldn't take it out of general usage by
society.

"The only words that haven't been registered are Zitsers and Popplars"

On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 1:41 AM, Leif B. Kristensen <leif at solumslekt.org>
wrote:

> On Sunday 13. July 2008, Gregory Meyer, CPA wrote:
>
> >Actuzlly, I am wrong about this in that you can trademark it as far as
> >it relates to specific products, but can't prevent the generic use of
> >the word or within another context.
>
> Here's a relevant case study:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer
> --
> Leif Biberg Kristensen | Registered Linux User #338009
> Me And My Database: http://solumslekt.org/blog/
> My Jazz Jukebox: http://www.last.fm/user/leifbk/
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok mailing list
> Amarok at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/amarok/attachments/20080714/274e8ab2/attachment.html>