Are RL trademarks used in-world intended to be ironic?

It's OK Chas , you can disagree with me.........just this once.

I haven't tried it, so I wouldn't know. I would imagine that, typically, it's not easy. It would take some very considered thought, in the case of SL, and would seem like more trouble than it's worth (to me), but if you were going big and wanted to be the next Dazzle, and wanted to earn a rl income from it, definitely.

I responded before I ever knew that HAV3 unit had anything to do with this thread or that there was some other thread. I still have no idea what this other thread might be. The implication that people are only "bashing" Bigwig was annoying enough that I wrote this post. And ended up bashing Bigwig by saying "robot", thus proving your point.

There doesn't seem to be an official statement from The Coca Cola Company directly, but it seems to be implied by alleged official quotes.

http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2007/06/28/coca-cola-gives-away-its-trademark-in-sl/

Hey, I resemble that remark!

So, in your eyes, using the logo without the name is...acceptable?

/me gets confused

He's not a robot. He's a HAV!

...and, Chas, I think he's got a lot of relevance in this thread. The OP asked why builders would use real life logos on their products. He's a content creator and he's actually doing this. So far he's the only one who has admitted to doing it in this thread and he's justifying his reasons for doing it. Even if people don't accept his reasoning, that doesn't mean that he isn't relevant to the thread or that he's making it all about him.

He and I disagree on this issue, although we agree that it isn't a major crime on the grand scale of things. It's pretty harmless. He's certainly adding to the thread though.

Fair enough.

But I assure you all, I'm in this for the enjoyment of it all. I'm not in this to screw other people. That's all I can say. Be as critical as you want about this, it won't change the fact that 1) I agree and 2) I disagree. *shrugs*

Malachi, as long as the original image wasn't digital, infringing a copyright isn't criminal, it's civil. It's up to the infringed party to police. Companies infringe on each others' intellectual property all the time as a business risk based on their assessment of the cost/benefit ratio, including assessment of validity and enforceability of claims. (Blatant infringement is usually too costly, thank goodness.)

So, while you can make an ethical or legal argument, in the end it's a business decision.

Note that he isn't copying Nikon cameras wholesale, or competing with Nikon. He doesn't even know whether Nikon cares. He's taking the risk that they might, and he runs the risk of a lawsuit if they do. He is perfectly entitled to do so.

If his object is not copy/xfer, and you copy it, you're violating DMCA and committing a criminal act according to US laws. There is a difference. You may think there's not, but US laws *do* make a significant distinction.

/me points to post #36 for a solution.

Overall (and this is just a rule of thumb for me) whenever I see a RL brand name on a product being sold in SL, it has always made me think the product itself was inferior, and only the addition of a recognizable brand name would induce anyone to spend their money on it.

I am certain that's not always the case - and of course, the "true" RL brands that come into SL and try to make a go at success with their own islands and products and branding have actually been known (I think) to make some stuff that's worth buying. But not much.


Personally, if I could make things that people wanted to buy, I'd want my own name on the stuff.

I will do this. I agree with you guys, but not in the sense that you think. I prefer to have my own identity, I always have--clearly you can see this is my own signature...I take pride in GBD, and aim to have that brand heard.

I agree Trout, on all accounts.

Oh, so it's a one way street Chas? That's ridiculous...oh come on. I'm running the forums and I make everyone talk about me? That's crazy talk man.

Wow, that was incredibly rude Lexxi. Firstly, Trout is right, I'm an HAV 3 unit...not a robot. But mostly, that was a pretty mean way to word things.

Geez.

I made a model of my Martin guitar in SL, using pictures I took of my Martin guitar. Do you think I should photo-shop out the logo?

That decision is up to Martin & Co.

I've done the same thing with a number of my RL instruments. I name them what they are representative of. If any of the companies sends me a cease & desist letter, I will comply.

I don't sell these items, though I do give them away (copy/mod/xfer). I realize I'm running a risk here but fankly I don't think it's a big one. I sell things I make, but I don't sell any branded items. It's not my intention to profit from the use of any company's logo.

For example, I wouldn't hesitate to make myself a Nike shirt with a nice swoosh on it if I felt like it. But I wouldn't sell such Nike shirts.

BTW, companies have to be careful about things like SL. The wisest thing for most of them to do is turn a blind eye. Pressing lawsuits isn't likely to benefit them much; it's more likely to get them bad publicity. But allowing free use of their logos would also be a mistake, because who knows, someday they might have a stake in the virtual world.

Wow, thank you. To be mentioned with respect in here is a rare thing...it's nice to hear.

Cheers.

Yes, perhaps. But only Michael would interpret every single post on the subject a personal attack when other people and myself (including the OP Qie) were trying quite hard to make this a non-flaming general discussion.

Of course Michael can put his point of view. He's a forum member, but his getting on his very, very high horse every single time is becoming a little tiresome. People are often accused of attacking Michael because of who he is. A rather odd statement, what?

The fact is, you cannot simply disagree with Michael, as any opinion other than his own is seen as a personal attack by 'us guys'. Discussion as such is impossible. Not much fun, really, especially when it provokes truly personal and vitriolic attacks on someone who is probably very talented and really is very good for SL.

Hmmm... "GlowBox", "WhisperBox"... one might think the OP was an elaborate troll.

/me points to post #39. Michael is violating the TOS, pure and simple. LL has stated that any resident may AR someone like Michael, and all his cameras will be removed. I think it's pretty damned clear how LL feels about it.

[Edit: For people who can't find it:

Linden staff generally removes content that uses trademarks without apparent authorization, with or without giving notice to the object owner. This generally includes all real life corporate logos and brand names.

It is often difficult to tell what may or may not be trademarked. However, use of designer logos and brand names without permission, such as Gucci, Nike, Louis Vuiton, etc., are usually not acceptable. Any resident may file an abuse report if they see any other resident making unauthorized use of trademarked material in Second Life.]

I already said it doesn't make things any less 'wrong' in an earlier post, sorry for thinking you'd remember .

/me nods

I know, but it was not directed at you.

Some of them are personal attacks Chas, to deny that would be outright lying.

I don't ride any high-horse. I tell you what I think in a straightforward manner...I really try not to patronize or act 'high and mighty.' And there is definitely a bias towards me. Denying that is silly.

So, no one can just disagree with me? Well...what about some of you. Are you not calling the kettle black here?



Isn't that what you're doing to me?

I don't know...I grow weary.

But of course we won't do that will we?

We'll let Michael reconsider, as Desmond has suggested, and perhaps the Glowbox camera will be THE camera used by SL photographers in the near future, and something Michael can be truly proud of.

That didn't go unnoticed...no need to call out a clever joke for us stupid audience members.