Slashdot Mirror
Web Ad Trademark Law To Be Retested
scubacuda writes "News.com et al report that The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Wednesday found Playboy Enterprises can pursue charges that Excite and Netscape Communications violated its trademark by selling banner advertisements triggered by the terms 'playboy' and 'playmate.' The decision reverses a district court ruling that dismissed the suit without a trial in 2000. Playboy 'clearly holds the marks in question, and defendants used the marks in commerce without (its) permission,' a split three-judge panel wrote in its majority decision." This is a shame, because the first judge to look at this case seems to have pretty much gotten it right: "Although the trademark terms and the English language words are undisputedly identical, which, presumably, leads plaintiff to believe that the use of the English words is akin to use of the trademarks, the holder of a trademark may not remove a word from the English language merely by acquiring trademark rights in it."
No, dumbfuck and I'll go even further. I don't think Linus would have a problem if Microsoft used the keyword "Linux" in thier web pages about TCO. That's all "adwords" are. Words that actually existed before the company are even more repulsive targets of corporate ownership.
"Playboy" was a word before the magazine. The company's attempt to restrain all comercial use of the word is wrong headed. No one is going to confuse the average porn site for Playboy's, though they mostly don't care. Playboy's brand name has been eroded by competition, not tradmark infringment. They won't get what they had back even if they could, by some state sponsored black magic or Paladium, insure that no one but their authors could even use the word. They are just another bunch of pimps.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Can we just impeach these clowns or what. THe 9th circuit is so outrageous and wacko that they need to all be replaced. We need to start with some clean (or how about SANE) judges. While I may frequently disagree with several justices in the supreme court (the only other court with which I am familiar with the individual members), they at least are friggen sane.
These are the same people who said that VOLUNTARY recitation in schools of the pledge of allegiance violates the 1st amendment for using the words "under God" among other things.
They've done more. Googling for their recent flububs is an exercise left to the reader.
Cthulhu for president!
Part of your problem is your first sentence. You should not be looking for the Slashthink definition of words, but instead try sites like Dictionary.com or maybe your country's code to find their definition of "Trademark". This is much more relevent to the discussion that the "Slashdot definition."
P.S. Unless you are at least an appeals court judge what you "consider" to be doesn't mean jack, you self-important twit.