Trademark Violations..or not?

To add a little detail here....

The pic shown in the original post are straight from the 'creator's shop up for sale. I've been there myself, and counted no less than 18 different logos all in use on for-sale items. When the 'creator' was questioned about his possessing the licensing for the logos, he became incredibly belligerant and immediately banned the questioner from the sim. I know of at least three different people who asked him and got the same reaction.

There were at least four different AR's filed in regards to this, and in every case the AR's sat for nearly three weeks, then closed without word. In no case were the original reporter(s) told that the logos were there with permission and weren't a violation.

If these logos are indeed violations, and the Lindens dont act, then this will be a concrete example of LL's allowing trademark violations to continue. This means not only will others be able to justify their own violations ("LL let *them* do it!", but it'll then give the eventual lawsuit the cause to yank LL in as liable.

Considering the sources of these trademarks (the NFL, the NBA, and likely EA), who are all companies that fiercely and aggressively protect their trademarks, if anything will bring in trademark lawsuits into SL, this one is a fine candidate to spark it.

Despite my own loud complaints about LL and their slack management practices, I no more want to see SL shut down from LL getting sued into nonexistence than anyone else. So if it takes a few 'busybodies' to try to prevent that from happening, would think I'll side with the 'busybodies' than those who would be too pathetic (sorry - apathetic) to lift a finger.


- Newfie

They will no more crack down on this than they do Flea Market sellers who make/sell bootleg product right at the stalls (where you can actually watch sometimes I might add).
[..]
Lets face it, most folks running small clothing shops AREN'T cashing out big dividends.

My my aren't you a clever one.. No, I thought you had the intelligence to see it for yourself.. Obviously I was wrong, I apologize for the assumption.
But please continue I think you can come up with better quasi intelligent digs..

I'll be happy to respond to *on topic* posts. If you're looking to make personal attack, please feel free to IM them to me.
In the meantime, perhaps you'd like to explain how you figure I'm stating that I expect to hold LL up to perfection? I at no point made that statement.

If you really want to point out a different definition of reasonable, then by all means....say it. Then again, that might mean you'd actually have to provide a constructive statement rather than just jeering from the sidelines - sure you're ready for that change of pace?

Well if in real life they can not keep up with counterfeiters than how do you expect them to do so in SL?

Maybe an MPAA/RIAA (collecting agency)-like royalty system, where one can pay the RIAA directly (like radio stations) a part of the revenue.

Going to an extreme point of view here, but you do know us using our little pics for our forum thingy? Like mine is holly quin, could actually be considered a trademark violation..

No it isn't because you don't profit from a forum avatar. But, even if it was...I don't use such a trademarked image. I am someone that has had to deal IRL many times with IP theft and trademark abuse myself...I tend to respect those laws personally.

ahh, i thought if it was used with out permission period.. hmm well glad to know that.

ahh, i thought if it was used with out permission period.. hmm well glad to know that.

There are other types of violations, but those are more obscure and don't come up often. For instance if you used a trademarked image or character in a manner that adversely affected the original trademark holder's image/reputation or adversely affected their sales by sullying the character's public image then you can be liable for damages.

So...no making that Disney porn movie for you! =P

Can someone please explain to me whats the difference?!

That is why I seriously doubt you will find any of the major content creators in SL ever using someone else's IP or trademarked images, characters, logos or work.

Restrictions on secondary use of our materials:
The Site contains material which is derived in whole or in part from material supplied by The Green Bay Packers and other sources, and which is protected by international copyright and trademark laws. No material (including but not limited to the text, images, audio and/or video) and no software (including but not limited to any images or files incorporated in or generated by the software or data accompanying such software) (individually and collectively the "Materials" may be copied, reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, transmitted, or distributed in any way or decompiled, reverse engineered or disassembled, except that you may download one copy of the Materials on any single computer for your personal, non-commercial home use only, provided you keep intact all copyright and other proprietary notices. Modification of the Materials or use of the Materials for any other purpose is a violation of The Green Bay Packers' or other such sources' copyright, trademark and other proprietary rights. The use of any such materials on any other web site or networked computer environment is prohibited without the express written consent of The Green Bay Packers.

Emphasis theirs. It's pretty clear that the logo of the green bay packers may not be used in something like SL without written permission.

I imagine most other teams in the NFL and other sports have similar passages.