User Pay - A leftwing blogger on Baglow vs FD

[fourhorses]

Am I to understand that Speech Warriors™ is a trademarked term? If so, it strikes me that was done purely to institute a trademark violation case without the ™ present. Many people I suspect don't know how to type that. That seems almost like entrapment, at least if I understand the meaning of that word correctly.

™ is notification to the reader that the word or phrase is trade marked, but not registered as such

® is notification to the reader that the word or phrase is trade marked and is registered with CIPO (Cdn Intellectual Property Office)


The difference being is that the author using ™ has not filed with CIPO and affirmed/sworn that he has conducted a due diligent search of the word or phrase, that it has not been previously used in that capacity by someone else before hand - also that CIPO has reviewed his application, posted notice of the application should someone care to dispute, and determined that the word, phrase or graphic can indeed be trademarked for the submitted identification / association purposes.

Because the ™ author hasn't undergone the rigors of the trademark application process does not necessarily mean that he cannot protect his trademark but the onus falls upon the author in a dispute to prove originality, consistency and correct usage.

The ® (registered version) gives the author the slam dunk protection under federal legislation (in most cases) as long as he has demonstrated consistency and correct usage. The originality is registered with the government.

In some cases the word or phrase is too generic, too similar or the intended usage is too vague or broad, and would probably fail under CIPO application, thus an author attempts to stake claim through a more general common law property right ™ as to owing the trademark or enforcing the validity of same.

Speech Warriors™ may be a phrase someone has coined for a certain purpose or to identify something or other. The ™ tells us that it is not registered (or received registration notification yet). It may not be acceptable for registration - have to see the context of what the author is claiming and the originality

[RedDog]

So the thing to watch for is something like Coca-Cola® then. I've commented in the past from advertising experience that I once got a cease and desist letter handed to me by senior management to "deal with". I'd published a material with no hyphen in the brand Coca-Cola®. The hyphen is required to be there.

It would appear their people all over the world perhaps right down to local delivery drivers scrutinize local use of their identity, perhaps getting a bonus for exposing a violation. I cannot otherwise imagine how someone in Atlanta would be aware of the work in question unless someone locally informed them.

I've read in AdWeek that Disney® is involved in some 3,000 cases around the world at any time concerning their trademarks, images and characters. They successfully won against West Edmonton Mall over their original theme park name being Fantasyland® but were allowed to continue to call the hotel at the mall "Fantasyland Hotel", which it still is today.

[fourhorses]

So the thing to watch for is something like Coca-Cola® then. I've commented in the past from advertising experience that I once got a cease and desist letter handed to me by senior management to "deal with". I'd published a material with no hyphen in the brand Coca-Cola®. The hyphen is required to be there.

It would appear their people all over the world perhaps right down to local delivery drivers scrutinize local use of their identity, perhaps getting a bonus for exposing a violation. I cannot otherwise imagine how someone in Atlanta would be aware of the work in question unless someone locally informed them.

I've read in AdWeek that Disney® is involved in some 3,000 cases around the world at any time concerning their trademarks, images and characters. They successfully won against West Edmonton Mall over their original theme park name being Fantasyland® but were allowed to continue to call the hotel at the mall "Fantasyland Hotel", which it still is today.

I've dealt with trademarks and associated issues at work for a couple decades now. From what I've seen, the cease and desist letters like the one noted above, are required enforcement otherwise the trademark holder could be deemed to have abandoned his trademark protection.

We had several cases of receiving cease and desist letters where the ® holder claimed we infringed on his registered trademark. We had a very, very similar trademark with similar but differentiable applications and scope, albeit a TM version - however, ours originated and were out in the marketplace some 20-30 years prior to their registrations. In essence, their claim that they conducted a diligent industry / market search for their application to ensure there was no conflicting trademarks, was false. We had the documentation to support our FOAD reply.

So the lesson is that just because it is a TM version doesn't necessarily mean that it is not defendable, and that you can infringe and just because one gains a ® does not necessarily mean that it is totally exclusive.

[Edward Kennedy]

More from Dawg (and he uses a modified version of Narrow Back's avatar):

How to bury the lede
By Dr.Dawg on June 25, 2012 6:22 PM | 1 Comment and 0 Reactions


Blogger gag.jpg

The Globe & Mail does it again. A young G20 activist, who has just had several charges against him dropped, is suing the Toronto and Ontario provincial police as well as an undercover cop for, among other things, listening in on his sexual activities and circulating the information.

But that’s all unproven, as the article repeats to ensure that we all get the point. Here’s the real story—in the very last sentence of a 19-para article:

Mr. Ichim now faces three counts of disobeying a court order for maintaining a blog, and said he expected to be jailed in what he called a further attempt at intimidating activists. [emphasis added]

Good grief! Surely even the Speech Warriors™ will throw aside their double standards at this point. Courts telling citizens they can’t run blogs? Since when?

I don't have a double standard, I agree that this is wrong. It is also wrong that it is being done to Topham.

I agree. The police are becoming like the KGB and this guy had his privacy violated.

I hope he gets them good, many enforcements agencies are hiding behind the system and abusing their power.

[Ogopogo]

It's obvious Dawg is trying to annoy conservatives by suggesting (with his use of the Trademark logo) that they are hypocrites who only care about the rights of other conservatives. Why not have FDers call Dawg's bluff and start defending the rights of those who are not conservatives but who do run afoul of the government in their use of the internet. It can be through supportive threads here at FD, perhaps posting on other sites to get the word out the conservatives do care about the rights of all, maybe even raising money here at FD to help out with the legal expenses of the accused regardless of ideological affiliation. Both Connie and Edward Kennedy have agreed that what happened to the G20 activist was wrong and with Connie reaching out to left-wing blogger Fern Hill I can't think of a better way to annoy the Left and call them on their hypocrisy for not defending the rights of those they disagree with.

Anyway, Here's more from Dawg on this subject:

Ontario Cons lose fight
By Dr.Dawg on June 27, 2012 12:18 PM | 1 Comment and 0 Reactions


Free speech duct.jpg

And speaking of free expression…here is perhaps another case where we might hear from our Speech Warrior™ friends. Eventually.

Ontario Conservatives have been trying to muzzle a progressive Ontario coalition of unions called Working Families since they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in last year’s provincial election.

They have just lost a unanimous decision at the Ontario Court of Appeal.

And this is telling:

While the Tories could seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, PC MPP Lisa MacLeod said the party is determining its course of action.

“We’re leaving our options open but we will continue to fight this in the court of public opinion,” MacLeod (Nepean—Carleton) said from Ottawa.

“It’s something we firmly believe in and something we’re going to continue to pursue,” she said.

“If left unchecked the Working Families will continue to attack Progressive Conservative party leaders as it has from Ernie Eves to John Tory and, of course, Tim Hudak.” [Emphasis added]

It really doesn’t get any clearer than that.

[LAR]

Mr. Ichim now faces three counts of disobeying a court order for maintaining a blog, and said he expected to be jailed in what he called a further attempt at intimidating activists.

As usual Dawg leaves out any information that doesn't support what he's bleating on about that day. Near as I could tell Mr. Ichim ignored a publication ban on an officer's name during a trial. He was still allowed to blog and his blog continues. The most recent entry is June 27.
I actually hope his lawsuit succeeds because I feel citizen's rights were violated during the G20.

[Connie Fournier]

I constantly speak out for the rights of people on the left. I've spoken out against police abuse at G20 and Occupy, and any other place where civil rights violations have happened. I was against the prorogation and closing prison farms. I've worked closely with the left in fighting C-30, and I even stood by them and fought the omnibus budget bill. In fact, I was on Parliament Hill at a leftwing rally against the budget bill, roasting my butt off. I didn't see the good doctor there.

The ironic thing is that he knows that I have been working hard to support democracy for the left as well as the right, and his response is to repeatedly insult me and warn other lefties not to "work with me".

I just can't take his foolishness seriously.

[backhoe]

I constantly speak out for the rights of people on the left. I've spoken out against police abuse at G20 and Occupy, and any other place where civil rights violations have happened. I was against the prorogation and closing prison farms. I've worked closely with the left in fighting C-30, and I even stood by them and fought the omnibus budget bill. In fact, I was on Parliament Hill at a leftwing rally against the budget bill, roasting my butt off. I didn't see the good doctor there.

The ironic thing is that he knows that I have been working hard to support democracy for the left as well as the right, and his response is to repeatedly insult me and warn other lefties not to "work with me".

I just can't take his foolishness seriously.

You have walked the walk- all the dirty dog has done is bloviate.

[Edward Kennedy]

A few years ago I met a fone fellow who has become a steady client.. We self identified as the antithesis of the other but saw common ground of hostility against the system. We have become quite respectful but this fellow is a true leftist, not of the same ragged and filthy malignant stuff of the lefturds I confront in my observations here.

The "unnoteworthy" legends in their own minds we have come to despise are rejects from the camp of the left, much like cast off waste products.

[BlawBlaw]

So the thing to watch for is something like Coca-Cola® then. I've commented in the past from advertising experience that I once got a cease and desist letter handed to me by senior management to "deal with". I'd published a material with no hyphen in the brand Coca-Cola®. The hyphen is required to be there.

Sometimes bar that serve "rum and coke" will get a letter saying it has to be changed to either "rum and cola" or "rum and CokeTM"

A TM is only good where it is being used while a registered trademark is good across the country, even in areas where your goods and services are not being sold.

[Ogopogo]

Dawg plays the hypocrisy card again:

The Speech Warriors™ will be all over this one
By Dr.Dawg on August 29, 2012 5:31 PM | 16 Comments and 0 Reactions


http://drdawgsblawg.ca/2012/08/the-spee ... ne-5.shtml

[Red Green]

Personally, this is the first I've heard of it. And it's not really a free speech issue. The chick got a prize from one group and some other groups are upset about it. OK, big deal. Everyone kept their freedom and their own property so I think Dawg is barking up trees where there's no Ms. Mews.

[BlawBlaw]

There's a bit of a difference between suing/prosecuting/violently threatening/shouting down someone you disagree with and being angry with a third party who honors someone you disagree with. SpeechWarriorsTM understand the difference; DickHeadsTM don't appear to.

[Edward Kennedy]

Dogs are known for pissing on fire hydrants, sniffing curly cones, eating excrement, licking their own anal and genital areas, and humping anything they can mount.

[Connie Fournier]

Mark and I have been talking about this and we've decided that we should not have articles from DrDawg's Blawg on Free Dominion. At this point, we are thinking our new policy should be that articles by bloggers who sue or threaten to sue should not be up for debate on this site. If anyone is crazy enough to go over there and risk their financial future to have a debate with him, of course they are free to do so (although it appears that less and less people are inclined to take that risk these days), but I don't feel comfortable with those debates taking place here.

I replaced the text of Ogogpogo's article with a link to the original site because people had already responded to it and I didn't want to ruin the flow of the conversation, but I think that from this point on we should not link to that site, either. I don't want to feel responsible for sending FD readers to a site where they might get into trouble.

This is a brand new policy so, Ogopogo, I don't want you to think you broke any rules. We just think that this will be in the best interest of all FD readers for the future.