Quote:
Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin
[I]It goes beyond that; it is in fact an imperative created by the nature of trademrk law. You see, a trademark has to be enforced if you want to keep it- if you don't assert ownership continually then the argument can be made, successfully, that the trademark has passed into the public domain as happened to, for two examples, Nylon and Aspirin. Xerox' lawyers were notorious for hurling C&Ds at any and everyone who used "Xerox" as a synonymn for "photocopy," and pretty much succeeded in suppressing it- and it was for that reason. All that's necessary to make such a case is that the trademark-holder has known or even should have known about unauthorized use, and done nothing about it.
|
That would explain a great deal, including the question of why the Estate takes a firm stance against non-profits as well as the parasites. It seems logical from a legal standpoint that they could not differentiate.
It isn't an ideal setup, but if that's the way they have to play the game, what can they do about it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin
Addendum: this goes back a very long time: the first edition of Dungeons & Dragons included Hobbits, Ents and Balrogs; the Estate forced the change in the 2d ed. to Halflings, Treants and "Type VI Demons (Balor)." Elves, Dwarves and Orcs got through, while retaining heavy Tolkien aspects- but orcs, justified as an obscure A-S word for unspecified monsters, became green with pig-snouts rather than Tolkienian Orcs.
|
I can remember that. I was a novice D&Der back in the day, and I recall my father having the first edition game, which did name "hobbits". That indeed did not last long.