In article <UlPDb.159878$I53.6445421@twister.southeast.rr.com >, "Nathan
Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> writes:

>> Do any of you understand intellectual property rights and copyright law?
>
>intellectual property is a new frontier thats only beginning to be explored.
>there is very little existing case law on it because people like me fold and
>settle rather than risk everything fighting a corporate giant.

I have to disagree with you there, Nathan. Intellectual property law covers
copyrights, trademarks and patents and is a well-established branch of
commercial law. The Internet has made it very easy to circumvent many
intellectual property constraints (witness p2p file sharing) and that is what
is being explored right now.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html

 

In article <UlPDb.159878$I53.6445421@twister.southeast.rr.com >, "Nathan
Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> writes:

>> Do any of you understand intellectual property rights and copyright law?
>
>intellectual property is a new frontier thats only beginning to be explored.
>there is very little existing case law on it because people like me fold and
>settle rather than risk everything fighting a corporate giant.

I have to disagree with you there, Nathan. Intellectual property law covers
copyrights, trademarks and patents and is a well-established branch of
commercial law. The Internet has made it very easy to circumvent many
intellectual property constraints (witness p2p file sharing) and that is what
is being explored right now.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html

 

"Matt Macchiarolo" <mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon> wrote in message
news:20031217094540.07961.00000596@mb-m03.aol.com...
> I have to disagree with you there, Nathan. Intellectual property law
covers
> copyrights, trademarks and patents and is a well-established branch of
> commercial law.

nothing has really been challenged yet which is why there are so few
attorneys who specialize in intellectual property, and its why those who do
charge so much. theres a ton of good information concerning intellectual
property at http://www.eff.org/IP/


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com

 

"Matt Macchiarolo" <mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon> wrote in message
news:20031217094540.07961.00000596@mb-m03.aol.com...
> I have to disagree with you there, Nathan. Intellectual property law
covers
> copyrights, trademarks and patents and is a well-established branch of
> commercial law.

nothing has really been challenged yet which is why there are so few
attorneys who specialize in intellectual property, and its why those who do
charge so much. theres a ton of good information concerning intellectual
property at http://www.eff.org/IP/


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com

 

"Matt Macchiarolo" <mlmacchia@aol.comspambgon> wrote in message
news:20031217094540.07961.00000596@mb-m03.aol.com...
> I have to disagree with you there, Nathan. Intellectual property law
covers
> copyrights, trademarks and patents and is a well-established branch of
> commercial law.

nothing has really been challenged yet which is why there are so few
attorneys who specialize in intellectual property, and its why those who do
charge so much. theres a ton of good information concerning intellectual
property at http://www.eff.org/IP/


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com

 

In article <g5_Db.134539$Vu5.8288580@twister.southeast.rr.com >, "Nathan
Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> writes:

>nothing has really been challenged yet which is why there are so few
>attorneys who specialize in intellectual property, and its why those who do
>charge so much. theres a ton of good information concerning intellectual
>property at http://www.eff.org/IP/

Many IP attorneys don't work for law firms, they work for the corporations that
need their services. I personally know 2 IP attorneys that work for Big Three
OEM suppliers. Other examples would be attorneys who work for publishers or
record labels that specialize in copyright law. I'd guess that there or more
such specialists that work for these kinds of companies than work
independently.

The Internet technology has made IP violations so wide------ that the law
hasn't had a chance to catch up or adapt, and that's why I'd agree that there
have been few IP challenges in regards to how IP laws apply *online.*

But there are reams of real-world caselaw involving intellectual property
rights.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html

 

In article <g5_Db.134539$Vu5.8288580@twister.southeast.rr.com >, "Nathan
Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> writes:

>nothing has really been challenged yet which is why there are so few
>attorneys who specialize in intellectual property, and its why those who do
>charge so much. theres a ton of good information concerning intellectual
>property at http://www.eff.org/IP/

Many IP attorneys don't work for law firms, they work for the corporations that
need their services. I personally know 2 IP attorneys that work for Big Three
OEM suppliers. Other examples would be attorneys who work for publishers or
record labels that specialize in copyright law. I'd guess that there or more
such specialists that work for these kinds of companies than work
independently.

The Internet technology has made IP violations so wide------ that the law
hasn't had a chance to catch up or adapt, and that's why I'd agree that there
have been few IP challenges in regards to how IP laws apply *online.*

But there are reams of real-world caselaw involving intellectual property
rights.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html

 

In article <g5_Db.134539$Vu5.8288580@twister.southeast.rr.com >, "Nathan
Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> writes:

>nothing has really been challenged yet which is why there are so few
>attorneys who specialize in intellectual property, and its why those who do
>charge so much. theres a ton of good information concerning intellectual
>property at http://www.eff.org/IP/

Many IP attorneys don't work for law firms, they work for the corporations that
need their services. I personally know 2 IP attorneys that work for Big Three
OEM suppliers. Other examples would be attorneys who work for publishers or
record labels that specialize in copyright law. I'd guess that there or more
such specialists that work for these kinds of companies than work
independently.

The Internet technology has made IP violations so wide------ that the law
hasn't had a chance to catch up or adapt, and that's why I'd agree that there
have been few IP challenges in regards to how IP laws apply *online.*

But there are reams of real-world caselaw involving intellectual property
rights.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html

 

BMW has done the same to the Mini name....

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

travis wrote:
>
> All of this stuff reminds me of the VWOA crap going on where VW is
> having their lawyers contact people who are doing as little as just
> displaying a VW logo on their non-profit website and telling them to
> remove it. Sounds like someone needs to clean house at VWOA and Jeep
> in the PR departments. Ridiculous.
>
> On 16 Dec 2003 15:54:25 -0800, Jason90715@yahoo.com (Jason Williams)
> shared the following:
>
> >Nathan,
> >I have followed your past dealings with DC and I can now feel your
> >pain. My wife has always refered to me and my Jeep'n buddies as 'Jeep
> >Creeps'. What other group of people will waive at total strangers
> >just because of what they drive? She always, still does, when I
> >return or initiate a 'Jeep Wave'. she then started calling us
> >Jeeples. Well, she decided to start a business called Jeeples. With
> >a slogan of "A different kind of people". She applied for a trademark
> >of Jeeples. We just recieve this today.
> >
> >"We are trademark counsel for DaimlerChrysler Corporation. As you are
> >no
> >doubt aware, DaimlerChrysler Corporation is the owner of the JEEP
> >trademark. In addition to using JEEP to identify vehicles,
> >DaimlerChrysler
> >uses JEEP trademark in connection with other products including, but
> >not
> >limited to, clothing, baby carriages, and toys. By virtue of
> >DaimlerChrysler's long use of JEEP and extensive advertising, JEEP has
> >become a well known, if not famous, trademark entitled to a broad
> >scope of
> >protection or exclusivity of use.
> >
> >It has come to DaimlerChrysler's attention that your application for
> >the
> >mark JEEPLES for clothing was published in the November 25, 2003 issue
> >of
> >the Trademark Official Gazette. On December 8, 2003, we filed a
> >request
> >for an extension of time to file a Notice of Opposition.
> >
> >In our opinion, your JEEPLES trademark is confusingly similar to the
> >JEEP
> >trademark and likely to cause confusion. Accordingly, DaimlerChrysler
> >respectfully requests that you expressly abandon that application and
> >cease
> >any plans to use the mark. If you do not expressly abandon the
> >application, DaimlerChrysler will have no choice but file a Notice of
> >Opposition. Moreover, if you begin to use the mark on clothing,
> >DaimlerChrysler will not hesitate to assert its legal and equitable
> >rights.
> >
> >We hope that this issue may be resolved on an amicable basis. If you,
> >or
> >your legal counsel, have any questions, please do not hesitate to
> >contact
> >me."
> >
> >At least I'm not out too much money.
> >I didn't think we would worry them too much as we are promoting Jeeps
> >in a positive style. You know, responsible off roading.
> >Oh well.
> >Jason
>
> --
> Travis
> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
> Do unto others. Then split.
> Happy trails!!!
> :wq!

 

BMW has done the same to the Mini name....

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

travis wrote:
>
> All of this stuff reminds me of the VWOA crap going on where VW is
> having their lawyers contact people who are doing as little as just
> displaying a VW logo on their non-profit website and telling them to
> remove it. Sounds like someone needs to clean house at VWOA and Jeep
> in the PR departments. Ridiculous.
>
> On 16 Dec 2003 15:54:25 -0800, Jason90715@yahoo.com (Jason Williams)
> shared the following:
>
> >Nathan,
> >I have followed your past dealings with DC and I can now feel your
> >pain. My wife has always refered to me and my Jeep'n buddies as 'Jeep
> >Creeps'. What other group of people will waive at total strangers
> >just because of what they drive? She always, still does, when I
> >return or initiate a 'Jeep Wave'. she then started calling us
> >Jeeples. Well, she decided to start a business called Jeeples. With
> >a slogan of "A different kind of people". She applied for a trademark
> >of Jeeples. We just recieve this today.
> >
> >"We are trademark counsel for DaimlerChrysler Corporation. As you are
> >no
> >doubt aware, DaimlerChrysler Corporation is the owner of the JEEP
> >trademark. In addition to using JEEP to identify vehicles,
> >DaimlerChrysler
> >uses JEEP trademark in connection with other products including, but
> >not
> >limited to, clothing, baby carriages, and toys. By virtue of
> >DaimlerChrysler's long use of JEEP and extensive advertising, JEEP has
> >become a well known, if not famous, trademark entitled to a broad
> >scope of
> >protection or exclusivity of use.
> >
> >It has come to DaimlerChrysler's attention that your application for
> >the
> >mark JEEPLES for clothing was published in the November 25, 2003 issue
> >of
> >the Trademark Official Gazette. On December 8, 2003, we filed a
> >request
> >for an extension of time to file a Notice of Opposition.
> >
> >In our opinion, your JEEPLES trademark is confusingly similar to the
> >JEEP
> >trademark and likely to cause confusion. Accordingly, DaimlerChrysler
> >respectfully requests that you expressly abandon that application and
> >cease
> >any plans to use the mark. If you do not expressly abandon the
> >application, DaimlerChrysler will have no choice but file a Notice of
> >Opposition. Moreover, if you begin to use the mark on clothing,
> >DaimlerChrysler will not hesitate to assert its legal and equitable
> >rights.
> >
> >We hope that this issue may be resolved on an amicable basis. If you,
> >or
> >your legal counsel, have any questions, please do not hesitate to
> >contact
> >me."
> >
> >At least I'm not out too much money.
> >I didn't think we would worry them too much as we are promoting Jeeps
> >in a positive style. You know, responsible off roading.
> >Oh well.
> >Jason
>
> --
> Travis
> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
> Do unto others. Then split.
> Happy trails!!!
> :wq!