Moderators: ken6199, Dirk, bisme37, KingDavid, bwgood77, zimpy27, cupcakesnake, Domejandro, infinite11285, Harry Garris
TheNG wrote:While there is a reason behind all patent laws invention, I can say I'm 100% sure that if, from now on, it will not be possible to trademark any "slogan", the world as we know it will still manage to function pretty well without any significant loss.
dhsilv2 wrote:infinite11285 wrote:
Therein lies the problem.
You're stating your opinions as facts based on your erroneous beliefs of trademark law, and using those unfounded opinions to create false narratives about what LeBron's doing. There isn't a single thing unethical about what's going on here, but you seem to believe LeBron has nefarious intent with the filing of this trademark.
No, I'm stating opinions as opinions. You're now stating an opinion as a fact here to tell me what I said when you clearly weren't takin the time to read and understand what was said. Similar to the absurd statement that I think what Lebron is doing is nefarious. It think it is unethical, that is not the same thing as nefarious.
infinite11285 wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:infinite11285 wrote:
Therein lies the problem.
You're stating your opinions as facts based on your erroneous beliefs of trademark law, and using those unfounded opinions to create false narratives about what LeBron's doing. There isn't a single thing unethical about what's going on here, but you seem to believe LeBron has nefarious intent with the filing of this trademark.
No, I'm stating opinions as opinions. You're now stating an opinion as a fact here to tell me what I said when you clearly weren't takin the time to read and understand what was said. Similar to the absurd statement that I think what Lebron is doing is nefarious. It think it is unethical, that is not the same thing as nefarious.
When you correlate this particular harmless, commonplace trademark filing to "trademark abuse" and damages incurred from small businesses due to frivolous suits involving unmerited trademarks, without clarification, it's rather simple to see the bridge you're constructing to this being a nefarious action. I'm fairly certain LeBron isn't filing a trademark on "Taco Tuesday" to nickle and dime small businesses.
Doubling down by calling this an unethical action (which it isn't, and no court would agree to that) further validates my point.
dhsilv2 wrote:infinite11285 wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:
No, I'm stating opinions as opinions. You're now stating an opinion as a fact here to tell me what I said when you clearly weren't takin the time to read and understand what was said. Similar to the absurd statement that I think what Lebron is doing is nefarious. It think it is unethical, that is not the same thing as nefarious.
When you correlate this particular harmless, commonplace trademark filing to "trademark abuse" and damages incurred from small businesses due to frivolous suits involving unmerited trademarks, without clarification, it's rather simple to see the bridge you're constructing to this being a nefarious action. I'm fairly certain LeBron isn't filing a trademark on "Taco Tuesday" to nickle and dime small businesses.
Doubling down by calling this an unethical action (which it isn't, and no court would agree to that) further validates my point.
Why would a court determine if something is ethical? That's like asking a homeless man to explain physics.
Imon wrote:LMAO.
There's a chain of Tex-Mex restaurants here in Texas (Rosa's Cafe) that sells Taco plates at a discount on Tuesdays and calls it "Taco Tuesday"
They've been doing it for many years. I always thought the phrase was a common saying among lovers of Tex-Mex food since I can't remember the first time I heard it but it's been around awhile.
infinite11285 wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:infinite11285 wrote:
When you correlate this particular harmless, commonplace trademark filing to "trademark abuse" and damages incurred from small businesses due to frivolous suits involving unmerited trademarks, without clarification, it's rather simple to see the bridge you're constructing to this being a nefarious action. I'm fairly certain LeBron isn't filing a trademark on "Taco Tuesday" to nickle and dime small businesses.
Doubling down by calling this an unethical action (which it isn't, and no court would agree to that) further validates my point.
Why would a court determine if something is ethical? That's like asking a homeless man to explain physics.
I don't understand your question. Trademark infringement cases involving the misuse of registered trademarks to deceive a particular market for monetary gain is a matter of ethics. Sometimes, they can even be criminal. These matters are settled in court.
dhsilv2 wrote:infinite11285 wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:
Why would a court determine if something is ethical? That's like asking a homeless man to explain physics.
I don't understand your question. Trademark infringement cases involving the misuse of registered trademarks to deceive a particular market for monetary gain is a matter of ethics. Sometimes, they can even be criminal. These matters are settled in court.
Ethical "relating to moral principles or the branch of knowledge dealing with these."
Courts do not determine morality. Morality is not a legal term. The use of trademarks is and has been unethical. This is not a legal matter.
infinite11285 wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:infinite11285 wrote:
I don't understand your question. Trademark infringement cases involving the misuse of registered trademarks to deceive a particular market for monetary gain is a matter of ethics. Sometimes, they can even be criminal. These matters are settled in court.
Ethical "relating to moral principles or the branch of knowledge dealing with these."
Courts do not determine morality. Morality is not a legal term. The use of trademarks is and has been unethical. This is not a legal matter.
I never said the courts determine matters of morality
They certainly decide matters of business ehtics which is the context of this entire thread.
dhsilv2 wrote:freethedevil wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:
The "x" would make this a completely different discussion...
No it doesn't, how us good morning america different from taco tuesday? It isn't.
The word America there makes these COMPLETELY different.
Bayside wrote:Man this is just mental. We are discussing the self proclaimed KING trademarking taco Tuesday for a poducat! Is it a podcast? WTF is he doing and why is this nesc.? Perfect example of why America, and Americans have become the mantle not for freedom but for being mental. Extreme Narcissism celebrated and promoted to the point of highest levels of office and sports character trademarking sayings that are older than they are. Really are these types of things necessary? Morally deprived characters suggesting courts as outcome to decide if legal or not. Court is for people usually so batshi=** crazy that they cant respond reasonable before hand to prevent it. And it only takes one crazy side to drag another through it incurring costs. Legal yes, but morally corupt, shallow, and self serving. God save us all from these fools.
freethedevil wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:freethedevil wrote:No it doesn't, how us good morning america different from taco tuesday? It isn't.
The word America there makes these COMPLETELY different.
Only if you think "good morning america" hasn't been used many times before.
Bayside wrote:Oh thanks for clarity. If that is what you get out of this thread and my post then my message probably not meant for you. But thanks for feed back.
Greyhound wrote:Bayside wrote:Oh thanks for clarity. If that is what you get out of this thread and my post then my message probably not meant for you. But thanks for feed back.
That is the only thing in your post I found worth commenting on (something actually related to basketball). All the regional morality and collective sanity nonsense is better left ignored.
By the way, I appreciate your appreciation.
Ballings7 wrote:This thread getting 16 pages is unreal.. offseason or not.
** looks around and leaves **
