OTOH, this guy is essentially selling competing toys using their name.
Uh, no. He wasn't.
Please get your facts straight before posting misleading nonsense. Gus' site was an archive of pictures of Star Wars collectibles. It wasn't selling anything.
Did anyone go to www.toysrgus.com and read the actual letter? Or are you just going by what News.com actually said?
Gus is a good friend of mine. The website was set up as an archive for Star Wars collectibles, of which there where hundreds, if not thousands. To the best of my knowledge, it was only an archive, not a store. The mere thought of that makes me laugh. If you knew Gus, you'd laugh, too.
Gus hasn't decided what he's going to do yet. He's considered complying, but sees that as only one option. He might fight it; he certainly has enough support. We'll see.
However, reading some of the comments above, I'm confused. It's okay to have a domain name that is the same as a trademarked name but having nothing to do with said trademark; but it's not okay to have one that sounds like a trademark? What kind of double standard is that? It sounds like something Microsoft would pull.
... had an article about this very topic this morning and how the Government is making it oh-so-difficult to export such chips. I wish I had read the article in futher depth. The Oregonian website (as painfully slow as it is) hasn't posted the article.
Slashdot Mirror
1. The site owner is asked to place a disclaimer on his page, "This site is in no way affiliated with XXX. XXX.YYY is a registered trademark of XXX"
He might have gone for this if he had been approached this way. However, he wasn't so I doubt it'll happen.
I'm still trying to figure out how it's trademark infringement...
OTOH, this guy is essentially selling competing toys using their name.
Uh, no. He wasn't.
Please get your facts straight before posting misleading nonsense. Gus' site was an archive of pictures of Star Wars collectibles. It wasn't selling anything.
Did anyone go to www.toysrgus.com and read the actual letter? Or are you just going by what News.com actually said?
Gus is a good friend of mine. The website was set up as an archive for Star Wars collectibles, of which there where hundreds, if not thousands. To the best of my knowledge, it was only an archive, not a store. The mere thought of that makes me laugh. If you knew Gus, you'd laugh, too.
Gus hasn't decided what he's going to do yet. He's considered complying, but sees that as only one option. He might fight it; he certainly has enough support. We'll see.
However, reading some of the comments above, I'm confused. It's okay to have a domain name that is the same as a trademarked name but having nothing to do with said trademark; but it's not okay to have one that sounds like a trademark? What kind of double standard is that? It sounds like something Microsoft would pull.
If that's the case, we'd better start shutting down sites like YaHooka (sounds too much like Yahoo!) and anonimizer.com (sounds too much like Anonymizer.com)!!
No more freedom of expression! Close the Internet! Last one off, please turn off the router.
... had an article about this very topic this morning and how the Government is making it oh-so-difficult to export such chips. I wish I had read the article in futher depth. The Oregonian website (as painfully slow as it is) hasn't posted the article.
My $0.0000000002 anyway.