Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
This is the exact argument he tried to use. Unfortunately FCB uses both cardboard and card board.
This is a pretty clear case of copy write infringment.
This is the exact argument he tried to use. Unfortunately FCB uses both cardboard and card board.
This is a pretty clear case of copy write infringment.
Unless it's confirmed, there is no existing tradename/trademark/copyright to infringe upon.He has some legal ground if he can make the argument that this dude is trying to confuse customers thinking they're going to FCB to participate in group breaks and end up at that site instead. That's the main legal argument I see. The key with trademark infringement is confusing a consumer. You have to make the argument that the "copycat" or close new named company is so close in resemblance and operation that they're confusing the consumer as to who is who. There's also a physical proximity component that comes into play but I don't really know how that works since these are both websites and not physical locations. I'm not an expert on this stuff yet, just will be hopefully in a few years.
aaaaaand he is claiming ignorance and refusing to change it.
I think its the same guy that owns this.
"They got the Golden Arches, mine is the Golden Arcs. They got the Big Mac, I got the Big Mick. We both got two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions, but their buns have sesame seeds. My buns have no seeds."
I hate sesame seeds, where is this McDowell's?
Will someone edit this thread title to mention the word "Leaf" or "Brian Gray" so Bob Loblaw will show up? He's everywhere except where you want him to be
Queens.
He actually probably wont be chiming in here because he is actually working on this in a legal capacity.
sent this from the new fcb app. go get yours.
Trademarks are pretty expensive and not an easy process, and i think you also have to have it (trademark name) published somewhere in print on top of everything.I'll state that FCB does not appear to own any Federal trademark for any combination of "freedom"and "cardboard."
Therefore it's false to state that cardboardfreedom.com infringes upon anything. Sure, it's a clear and purposefully similar name, but that's not a legal issue. That's a "you" problem for not trademarking a name you now want to protect.
Sending Jeff to supposedly look into this (IE strong arm) is a dick move. Idle threats from attorneys is total crap.
You either protected the name or you didn't...and nothing shows that you did.
Posted by witchcraft, voodoo and technological kung fu.
Trademarks are pretty expensive and not an easy process, and i think you also have to have it (trademark name) published somewhere in print on top of everything.