Quote:
Originally Posted by ThailandForum
Wouldn't bargain too hard, they might just serve a rite on your host and get you closed.
|
Basically, the ABC company are the only people with the absolute right to say that they make or sell ABC products. They grant (implicit or implied) rights to their resellers to use the name when selling ABC goods.
The DEF company, which makes and sells similar products, may not say that they are selling ABC products when they are in fact selling their own. Nor may they call their product range "ABC2" because that is close enough to mislead the public.
Nor may they package their products so as to mislead the public. One case before the Court involved a manufacturer of cough sweets, which were sold in a distinctive red-and-white wrapping, and sold to an illiterate public. A new rival manufacturer of cough sweets packaged their product in a very similar red-and-white wrapping, even though they used their own name. Evidence was put before the Court that many illiterate people asked shopkeepers for "red-and-white cough sweets", which persuaded the Court to grant damages and an injunction.
Going back to the ABC example, ABC may have the exclusive right to label their products ABC, but they don't have the exclusive right to use the words "ABC". Someone can say, "I repair ABC products", without infringing trademark or copyright, in the same way that a newspaper may write a review of ABC products. ABC could hardly try to ban a bad newspaper review on the grounds that ABC were the only people allowed to mention their product name.
You can also make and sell add-on ancillaries. People can say, "Works with Microsoft Windows", without ever having to ask Microsoft's permission.
Comparison ads are also allowed. The new DEF company, which competes with the market-leader ABC, can publish an ad along the lines, "10 reasons why DEF is better than ABC". (It's just that they can't say "DEF is ABC", or confuse the public into buying DEF when they really intended to buy ABC.)
Lawyers, however, will bluff and bluster if paid to do so. I once ran some comparison ads, comparing my new product against the market leader. Naturally, I quickly received irate letters from their very expensive lawyers, threatening to sue. I replied along the lines, "Please do! It will be fantastic free publicity!" (Sadly, they never sued.)
However... ThailandForum has made a point valid in real life. If your ISP is threatened by expensive lawyers, how will their nerve stand up? How important are you as a customer? They may close your website to protect themselves against a
perceived threat, and what can you do about that?
(Note. It is several years since I studied copyright law, which may have changed in the interim. Note also that the law differs in different jurisdictions. You may have to spend money on a local practicing lawyer if this matter is really important to you.)
Thanks for the help bro
