Page 1 of 1
Lone Wolf Issues Cease & Desist To Privateer Press regarding their Army Builder product
#1
Posted 03 February 2010 - 12:16 AM
http://www.belloflos...vateer-and.html
I don't know if this type of draconian policing of general conversation will make it's way to the Brewery, but I personally find Lone Wolf's actions misdirected. IMO it will accomplish the exact opposite of what they wish to achieve which is to drive customers, current and potential, away.
Anyway, feel free to discuss, but please keep it civil. It is their product after all and they can do what they like with it.
Cheers, Gary
I don't know if this type of draconian policing of general conversation will make it's way to the Brewery, but I personally find Lone Wolf's actions misdirected. IMO it will accomplish the exact opposite of what they wish to achieve which is to drive customers, current and potential, away.
Anyway, feel free to discuss, but please keep it civil. It is their product after all and they can do what they like with it.
Cheers, Gary
#5
Posted 03 February 2010 - 05:34 PM
Anyone else here hoover up today?
Hoover is the brand, Vaccuum Cleaner is the machine, same sorta thing as whats going on here. Do you think Hoover send out similar messages or are they happy that Hoover has pretty much replaced the word Vaccuum Cleaner? I know what I reckon
Hoover is the brand, Vaccuum Cleaner is the machine, same sorta thing as whats going on here. Do you think Hoover send out similar messages or are they happy that Hoover has pretty much replaced the word Vaccuum Cleaner? I know what I reckon
#9
Posted 02 March 2010 - 05:38 PM
I suppose the simple alternative is to write "army builder" as the phrase they have copywright over is "Army Builder", that is, they own the rights to the proper noun phrase, not the combination of two nouns used to describe something in the most logical possible way.
If they actually took this to court it would surely be found that this is far too simple a term to copywright outright? I'm not a lawyer, I'm an English teacher, and feel I have a valid linguistic argument here...
edited for ridiculously embarrassing mis-typing.
If they actually took this to court it would surely be found that this is far too simple a term to copywright outright? I'm not a lawyer, I'm an English teacher, and feel I have a valid linguistic argument here...
edited for ridiculously embarrassing mis-typing.
This post has been edited by phildodd: 02 March 2010 - 05:41 PM
Page 1 of 1


Sign In
Register
Help



MultiQuote





