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

I enjoy all of the input I've received. I think some of you need to look more closely as to whether you really think what I'm doing is 'wrong', or you're jumping on the band-wagon because it's easy to do. There are gray areas my fellow citizens...life isn't black and white....neither is content creation.

/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 .

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.

That's nice guys...thanks. Do it...go for it. Be the 'a typical' jerks of the world. Ya, I really deserve it don't I?

Michael, I'm a RL legal secretary and have been for years. I've worked in Patent and Trademark Law and I really do hate to break it to you, but Nikon is trademarked. The use of their name is a violation of Federal Trademark Law.

Now, the likelihood of them coming into SL and finding Nikon being used by you, and suing is very small. However, it's wrong, you know it's wrong, and no amount of justification is going to make it right.

I disagreed with him - go check my posts. He didn't act like it was a personal attack at all. We had a discussion and I proposed a workable solution, with which he agreed. Neither one of us personally attacked the other.

As a point of fact, I often disagree with Michael. I just do so respectfully.

Michael,

I NEVER SAID I was going to AR you. I'm saying that any resident COULD, and would be within rights to do so. Relax a little.

Sigh. I give up. Have fun!

Actually Mike is committing a fraud against his customers as well. He is representing his product as being associated with a RL company. Since his product is not endorsed by Nikon, it is fraudulent to claim otherwise.

Actually Mike is committing a fraud against his customers as well. He is representing his product as being associated with a RL company. Since his product is not endorsed by Nikon, it is fraudulent to claim otherwise.

Well I do have an SL Mercedes car, but I bought it from Mercedes, at their sim. I bought it because it tickles me to own a Mercedes, but I'm confident that I'm not infringing on any trademarks/copyrights/whatever, because I DID buy it from Mercedes. *shrug*

It's clearly wrong in the written-law aspect. The questions is, some people believe more strongly than others...and there really is no arguing that. We all learned growing up that 'stealing a penny is just as bad as stealing $100', which to me...is bullocks.

I think there are levels of encroachment. ...

You may be a slimy thief, and a person of despicable character, but at least you are honest about it. I'll give you that.

Well I do have an SL Mercedes car, but I bought it from Mercedes, at their sim. I bought it because it tickles me to own a Mercedes, but I'm confident that I'm not infringing on any trademarks/copyrights/whatever, because I DID buy it from Mercedes. *shrug*

I really did think the camera might be endorsed by Nikon, though, when I visited the shop. It was called a Nikon and had a Nikon number and everything. Looked like a Nikon. I didn't understand why Nikon, though, would have just one camera in game, so was confused. More confused as to what the camera did, but that is a different matter.

Then saw Nike in freebie boxes, and then saw a really long form that needs to be "I Agree"'d just to receive the free Mercedes uniform from the Mercedes island, and realized that just because something says Nike doesn't mean it is by Nike.

i become ENRAGED to think some little joe may be infringing on some multinational conglomerate sweatshop! makes my blood boil!
how dare you michael!?! each one of those cameras could pay some little boy a days wages!

i own a 'pre-AR' glowbox nikon though. it may become a collectors item