Strona www.elave.co.uk z filmem zatytułowanym “Nothing to hide” pojawiła się w maju 2007 roku. Ja zobaczyłem tą promocję dopiero dzisiaj.
Nudity has been used as a device within the ads to highlight the elave product range’s comprehensive ‘free from’ chemical list and the fact that the elave brand lists its ingredients openly on its packaging.
Trendy jakie pojawiły się w projektowaniu logotypów w roku 2007 opisane zostały w artykule na stronie www.logolounge.com.
Niby o gustach się nie dyskutuje. Ale od dłuższego czasu ze znajomymi wymieniamy się informacjami o logotypach i innych projektach robionych przez przysłowiowego “młodszego syna pani Krysi z księgowości”. Szczerze, to nawet nie wiem jak to przetłumaczę na język angielski. Tak czy siak. Sprawdźcie stronę www.blogopol.blog.onet.pl.
The Scottish Government is to spend £10,000 on adverts on the virtual billboards within Xbox 360 games.
Więcej szczegółów w artykule na stronie www.news.bbc.co.uk.
Oznaczenie MacCoffee może służyć jako znak towarowy dla produktów singapurskiego przedsiębiorcy, bo nikt nie ma wyłączności na prefiks, tak orzekł Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie. Tym samym oddalił skargę Mc Donald’s Corporation na decyzję Urzędu Patentowego (sygn. akt VI SA/Wa 1100/07).
W prawie amerykańskim mamy natomiast wyrok w sprawie Quality Inns Int’l v McDonald’s Corp., 695 F. Supp. 198 (D. Md. 1988). W dużym skrócie, Sąd orzekł, że używanie przez przedsiębiorstwo Quality International’s nazwy “McSleep” naruszyło prawa McDonald’s do całej grupy znaków, które są charakteryzowane przez prefiks “Mc” w połączeniu z rodzajowym oznaczeniem. Rozważania Sądu dotyczące rodzajowego znaczenia prefiksu “Mc”.
IX. GENERIC DEFENSE
Both Mr. Hazard, Quality International’s CEO, and Mr. Mosser, its vice president in charge of franchising, urged at trial that “Mc” has become a generic prefix meaning thrifty, consistent, and perhaps convenient. They urge that the notion of thriftiness comes from the association with the Scots and the perception that the Scots are thrifty. The Court was directed to the writings of H.L. Mencken, the famous Baltimore journalist and writer, who said:
Nearly all the English words and phrases based on Scotch embody references to the traditional penuriousness of the Scots, for example Scotch coffee, hot water flavored with burnt biscuit; to play the Scotch organ, to put money in a cash register; Scotch pint, a two-quart bottle; Scotch sixpence, a threepence; and the Scotchman’s cinema, Piccadilly Circus, because it offers many free attractions.
The American Language by H.L. Mencken (4th Ed. Abridged with Annotations and Material by Raven I. [appropriately] McDavid, Jr.), at pages 388-89.
Both Mr. Hazard and Mr. Mosser acknowledge that the aspect of “Mc” that includes consistency and convenience derives from McDonald’s and its extensive promotional efforts. They urge, however, that any such association with McDonald’s is now lost to the public domain by common usage.
In support of the contention that “Mc” as a prefix has derived a singular meaning and become part of the language, Dr. Roger W. Shuy, a linguist from Georgetown University, reviewed hundreds of journalistic uses of the prefix “Mc” for purposes of deriving its meaning and to evidence it common usage. Several examples will give a sampling of the broad range of his findings.
The term “McFood” has been used as follows: “It’s a push-button, do-it-yourself, convenience-oriented world. . . . Why cook when we can zap a Lean Cuisine in the micro, or order McFood from a drive-in McSpeaker.” Similarly, the word McLunch has been used for what kids are eating in school.
In the area of clothes, McFashion has been used in connection with smaller, specialized express stores for kids, imitating the concept of a fast food outlet.
McMedicine has been used to refer to prompt, inexpensive medical care centers, and McSurgery becomes surgery without overnight hospital stays.
McLaw has been used to describe the legal franchise phenomenon, suggesting that legal advice is dispensed through drive-in windows. Describing franchising in other areas have been McFuneral for funeral operations; McLube or McOil Change for the fast, little drive-in shops offering ten-minute oil changes; and McMiz for franchising of the Broadway musical “Les Miserables.” Even the franchising of local post office branches has been suggested to become McMail, and franchised tax preparation as McTax.
In the news and media area, USA Today has been characterized as McPaper, “fast news for the fast-food generation.” There was even a book called The Making of McPaper. The distillation of books or books without substance has been referred to as McBook, and similar characterizations have been made about digested news stories, McNews.
Even culture that has been subjected to mass marketing has been characterized with the prefix “Mc.” The proliferation of low-cost mass-produced art is McArt. One article even referred to McMozart.
Movies that are analogized to fast food which satisfy the appetite and taste good have been called McMovies or McCinemas. Similarly, there is McTelevision, McTelecast, and McVideo.
No subject seems to have been excluded. In connection with religion there has been a reference to McGod: “It was a difficult year for the McGod family network. [Jimmy Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, and Jerry Falwell] fought a major turf battle over control of the PTL McTelevangelism.”
One article perhaps summarized it all, “This is the era of instant gratification, of poptops, quick wash, fast fix, frozen foods, McEverything.”
A news report placed into evidence referred to the trial before this Court as taking place in the McCourt, which, of course, would make the judge the McJudge. While the Court understood that association with the Courthouse in Baltimore, it could not come to grips with the suggestion that the trial was before a McJudge. The Court could find few, if any, of the attributes of “Mc” used by McDonald’s or by the journalists otherwise to fit. Perhaps this McPinion will fulfill that prophecy.
After reviewing these articles and numerous others, Dr. Shuy reviewed the context of the “Mc” word and derived a list of 27 definitions for the prefix “Mc”: highly advertised; franchise; easy access; inexpensive; high volume; lacks prestige, comfort, cost; everyday; prepackaged; specialty chain; quick; convenient; reduces choices; self-service; mass merchandising; standardized; state of the art marketing; low brow; assembly line precision; uniform; market dominance formula; handy location; positive attitude; simple; comfortable; honest; looks okay; and working man. He reduced these to four terms which he characterizes as the definition of “Mc,” that is, “basic, convenient, inexpensive, and standardized.”
McDonald’s retained an outside firm to do its own internal marketing research into the public perception of the meaning of “Mc” and the conclusions reached were similar to those reached by Dr. Shuy. McDonald’s list, which was much shorter, distilled the following definitions: (1) “reliable at a good price,” (2) “prepackaged, consistent, fast, and easy” (3) “a prefix McDonald’s adds to everything it does,” and (4) “processed, simplified, has the punch taken out of it.”
Dr. David W. Lightfoot, a linguist from the University of Maryland, testified at trial on behalf of McDonald’s. He took no issue with the meanings derived by Dr. Shuy and by McDonald’s own internal survey. However, he disputed vigorously any notion that “Mc” is a generic word. He pointed out that “Mc” does not have a single easy identifiable meaning. For instance, of the 27 or so definitions derived by Dr. Shuy from the journalistic uses, many were not incorporated into Dr. Shuy’s condensed definition. Dr. Lightfoot concluded that all the meanings derived by Dr. Shuy, by McDonald’s and by him were essentially descriptive of McDonald’s Corporation and the reputation it has earned over the years. He concluded that whether or not there was a specific reference to McDonald’s Corporation in each article, in every case the allusion was to McDonald’s and its family of marks in a manner that was intended to be cute and playful.
The Court concludes that indeed the uses in the press of “Mc” plus a generic word are coined and novel to each article for the playful use by the author. In each case the allusion, whether express or implied, was to McDonald’s, sometimes flattering and sometimes pejorative. There was no single independent meaning of “Mc” understood in the language and its uses have been created to convey any one of several attributes that the author makes to McDonald’s.
This is not analogous to a circumstance where a product is referred to so frequently by brand name that even competitive brands are called by the one name and the brand identity is lost. On the contrary, the attribution of source to McDonald’s in the use of “Mc” is strong and persists. The Court notes that while most of the articles used by Dr. Shuy did not contain express allusions to McDonald’s, a very similar group of articles that he did not use in his analysis, but which conveyed the same meanings, made express allusions to McDonald’s. The Court therefore rejects any contention that McDonald’s has lost its right to enforce its marks because “Mc” has become a prefix with a single meaning that has become part of the English language and beyond McDonald’s control.
Amerykańskie zgłoszenie patentowe nr 20070288886.
Abstract
A digital rights management system permits an application owner to cause code to be injected into the application’s run-time instruction stream so as to restrict execution of that application to specific hardware platforms. In a first phase, an authorizing entity (e.g., an application owner or platform manufacturer) authorizes one or more applications to execute on a given hardware platform. Later, during application run-time, code is injected that performs periodic checks are made to determine if the application continues to run on the previously authorized hardware platform. If a periodic check fails, at least part of the application’s execution string is terminated–effectively rendering the application non-usable. The periodic check is transparent to the user and difficult to circumvent.
Po prostu strona www.steinbrener-dempf.com.
O’Grady v. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, 2005 CA App. Ct. Pleadings 28579H (CA App. Ct. Pleadings 2005). Wyjątki z tekstu.
Petitioners seek to stop a third party from providing the identities of persons who stole highly valuable trade secrets that belong to Apple Computer and were illegally disseminated through Petitioners’ websites. After conducting a thorough but unsuccessful investigation into this unauthorized disclosure, Apple served a narrowly tailored subpoena on an email service provider to recover the stolen materials and discover who had misappropriated Apple’s trade secrets. Asserting special protections they claim attach to their purported role as “journalists,” Petitioners moved for a protective order to block this essential discovery. The trial court denied the motion and this petition followed.
Apple, the real party in interest, is the victim of a serious theft. Unknown individuals stole trade secrets about an unreleased Apple product, code-named “Asteroid,” from secure Apple facilities. Petitioners deliberately posted these misappropriated trade secrets on their websites “PowerPage” and “AppleInsider.” These posts contained little more than outright copies of Apple’s unreleased, copyrighted design, verbatim excerpts from Apple technical specifications, Apple’s pricing projections for Asteroid, and Apple’s comparison of the product to its anticipated competition.
(…)
23. Respondent trial court granted Apple’s application on December 14, 2004, (Order Granting Ex Parte Application for Discovery and Issuance of Subpoenas (”Discovery Order 1″), Ex. 8, 71-72) authorizing Apple to serve subpoenas to “Powerpage.com, Appleinsider.com, and Thinksecret.com requiring each to produce all documents relating to any information posted on its site relating to an unreleased Apple product code named ‘Asteroid’ …” and to serve [*11] subpoenas on each of the Apple News Sites for information leading to the identity of “any individual or individuals who have knowledge regarding the posts on its site disclosing information about the Product … and individuals who received and/or edited information related to the Product.” Apple subsequently drafted and attempted to serve a subpoena on Apple Insider and Monish Bhatia.
Z informacji dostępnych dzisiaj z różnych źródeł.
Apple and Think Secret have settled their lawsuit, reaching an agreement that results in a positive solution for both sides. As part of the confidential settlement, no sources were revealed and Think Secret will no longer be published. Nick Ciarelli, Think Secret’s publisher, said “I’m pleased to have reached this amicable settlement, and will now be able to move forward with my college studies and broader journalistic pursuits.
Martwi mnie i w sumie dziwi, że sądy amerykańskie tak późno potwierdzają zasadę Mirandy w odniesieniu do zagadnienia ujawniania haseł (sic!). Wyrok w sprawie In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87951, 2007 WL 4246473 (D. Vt. 2007). W przypadku orzecznictwa ETPC warto zapoznać się z wyrokiem w sprawie Funke vs. France, [1993] ECHR 7 (25 lutego 1993 r.).
We wpisie na stronie www.woostercollective.com znajdziecie ciekawe przykłady zjawiska, nieudolnie przeze mnie przetłumaczonego z języka angielskiego na język polski jako rozmycie znaku towarowego (trade mark dilution). ;-)
Fundacja Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej opublikowała w listopadzie 2007 r. komunikat z badań “Stosunek do własności intelektualnej i praw autorskich”, plik PDF. Z lektury dowiedzieć można się m.in., że:
Oba utwory są chronione prawem autorskim i są nawet niezłe, prawda? Mamy też Toho Co., LTD v. Priority Records, LLC, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14093 (D. Cal. 2002). W związku z tym zgadnijcie jaki jest tytuł mojego nowego artykułu? Pozdrowienia dla Adama Zielińskiego, z którym piszę tą pracę. =)
An even more interesting thing has started to happen: unofficial, but sanctioned television show leaks on BitTorrent. Broadcasters aren’t posting their shows directly on PirateBay yet, but they are talking informally and giving copies of shows to a friend of a friend who is unaffiliated with the company to make a torrent.
Ciekawy artykuł na stronie www.last100.com. Jeszcze ciekawsze stwierdzenie w nawiązaniu do powyższej wypowiedzi, które jednocześnie wskazuje na lekką schizofrenię.
Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA), also known as Congressman Hollywood, is one of the most powerful members of the House when it comes to intellectual property issues, so when he muses aloud about “revisiting” the DMCA, people listen. Unfortunately, Berman wants to reform the DMCA because it doesn’t go far enough, and his ideas sound like they’re ripped right from the pages of the Big Content playbook.
Cały artykuł na ten temat dostępny jest na stronie www.arstechnica.com.
Na stronie www.laughingsquid.com dostępny jest ciekawy artykuł o reakcji przedsiębiorstwa Best Buy na krytykę ich działalności. We fragmencie listu do administratorów serwisu prawnik Best Buy napisał, że znak jest bardzo znany i sławny. W celach prawno prównawczych przypomnę fragment wyroku SPI w sprawie T-122/01, Best Buy Concepts vs. OHIM, OJ C 213, 06.09.2003, s. 30.
28.
As regards, first, the word mark best buy, the Court notes that it is composed of ordinary English words which clearly indicate an advantageous relation between the price of the services covered by the application and their market value.29.
It is, therefore, perceived immediately by the relevant public as a mere promotional formula or a slogan which indicates that the services in question offer the best buy possible in their category or the best price-quality ratio, as noted by the Board of Appeal in paragraph 17 of the contested decision.
Aktualizacja na dzień 13 grudnia 2007 r.
Best Buy oficjalnie żałuje, że wysłał pismo C&D. Szczegóły na stronie www.laughingsquid.com.
Posługując się skróconą wersją wyrażenia “not safe for work” przy odnośnikach, można spodziewać się, że treścią, do której one prawadzą będą m.in. obrazy, conajmniej niecenzuralne. Tymczasem w USA mamy zgłoszenie znaku towarowego nr 77338491, tak więc wypatrujmy ciekawych towarów i usług oznaczonych takim znakiem.