This is pushing it a bit

[161488303349]

---

Dirtnap Mumfuzz wrote:

 

Unless someone can show it to me, it seems quite apparent there is no where a statement that says 'you may not use any copyrighted and/or trademarked name or brand in your keyword terms" .

---

the statement contained in USA trade/commerce laws. can start here for the beginning of the legals: http://www.uspto.gov

+

have to look at the circumstance relating to use

SLM is a commercial operation specific designed for the sale of goods. its use is governed by USA trade laws. so is the search engine used in it

trademark and brandname is used to distinguish a creators products from another in commerce. in the case of Harley Davidson is used to distinguish Harley Davidson motorcycles from other types of motorcycles

stuffing your search field description with Harley Davidson is describing your motorcycle as a Harley Davidson. describing your motorcycle as a Harley Davidson is illegal in the USA. the act of passing off

+

the lawful expectation (the test) is that if as a customer on your commercial premises i enter the search keyword Harley Davidson i expect to get a listing of Harley Davidsons. not some other motorcycles made by other people

+

edit add:

if i want to include Harley Davidsons as well as yours on my search then i use keywords like: motorcycle

 

 

[Dirtnap Mumfuzz]

LOL I forgot all about this topic. It's easy to do, when there are so many more important things in life to think about.

On the other hand though and with a little luck, the A.D.D. Crowd is also preoccupied playing with their ear wax by now. And that is always a good thing.

 

I went to the link you provided, and did not find this identical information anywhere. The section you quoted seems rather incomplete, and therefore useless; the content seems broken and disambiguated, so I am forced to ask if you reinterpreted this or copied it directly. The absence of punctuation makes it that much more complicated to follow. As a result, I'm guessing you reiterated, because only the portions you wanted to mention seem to be included, and have been done so with vague interpretation.

However based on the information you provided, it would seem that trademark should mean the use of the term Harley Davidson only applies to any use in association with a motorcycle. You might be surprised to learn that Harley Davidson actually offers their own line of merchandise that goes far beyond just bikes..Everything from bandannas to motor oil..But I am pretty sure you forgot to consider that. Something about probably never stepping foot in a Harley show room...but as the previous owner of a 1950 Panhead, I can tell you that you are dead wrong.

For an example of how this works: the silk Pink Floyd necktie I bought years ago is a licensed product; but it is not music, or video, or anything of the aural sort. It's a piece of clothing, and it also required proper licensing in order to be branded as a licensed Pink Floyd product...which is not the same as saying Pink Floyd made it, by the way, the same for the sets of collectors Pilsner glasses I have.

Again, I am drawing a distinct line between copyright and trademark, because they are two different things.

A side note: how can you be a customer on a commercial premises, AND use a virtual system like an internet keyword search? A premises is defined as: a house or building, together with its land and outbuildings, occupied by a business. There is no physical building representing any merchants storefront within any context being used here, it is an online environment. Again, people spending too much time looking at screens forget there was already a tangible world outside. You seem to be suggesting you can physically be someplace and apply virtual tools at the same time. So how's that working out for you?

 

Rather than goose-step blindly along while quoting a blurry TOS I don't even understand like every other lemming with chronic kneejerkitis, I prefer to look at data;

There are currently approximately 2,200 listings that come back with the keyword search 'Harley", an increase of almost 200 items since the last time I checked in January.

At least 564 of those are vehicles, up from 520 items in January.

None of them look like new listings.

None of them appear to be licensed merchandise.

 

There are currently approximately 400 listings that come back with the keyword "Davidson", an increase of about 100 items since the last time I checked in January.

At least 125 of those are vehicles, up from 120 items in January.

None of them look like new listings.

None of them appear to be licensed merchandise.

 

There are currently approximately 300 listings that come back with the keyword "Harley Davidson", about the same as when I last checked in January.

At least 75 of those are vehicles, up from 70 items in January.

None of them look like new listings.

None of them appear to be licensed merchandise.

 

 

Did anyone else bother to monitor the listings before making assumptions? I didn't think so.

You may or may not notice that the majority of the products still listed do exactly what you say they can't do: use a trademarked branding to sell something else, made by someone else, without license.

So by your misunderstanding, does that mean that the term Harley Davidson can be used without license to sell anything EXCEPT a motorcycle? Or does it mean that you cannot list a bike with the term Harley Davidson, but a car, a picture, a pair of boots, a structure or anything not a motorcycle is just fine?  How does this apply to fan art, and do you know anything about that at all?

 

If there was any sort of 'crack down' taking place, why are there more listings now than just a couple months ago?

There are still nearly 300 products using this full term as a keyword, and the majority of them are not motorcycles at all. Very flagrant branding infringement occurs in many of the listings. The words Harley Davidson plainly appear in many of the listings. Why do these other obviously infringing listings persist while others are selectively taken down?

 

But more importantly is the clear indication that there is no consistency being applied; these older listings still exist, despite the indication that newer listings, such as the OP's have apparently been singled out. And since the priority here in this forum is more about bullish behavior, one-upmanship, anonymous smart mouthing and who is more right, there is total lack of regard for the real issue: absolutely no consistency in application of an assumed policy.

 

Nevermind the ever present pack of howler monkeys flaunting the stupidity of saying that using a brand name ANYWHERE is grounds for an infringement..Try telling that to a million successful eBay merchants who do it daily. I always get a good laugh at how people in SecondLife start to act like the world revolves around them. And once again, I truly appreciate the disregard of the actual point being made -that it appears you all are generally convoluting the terms and confusing YOURSELVES (and attacking anyone who dare say so)- in favor of constant mantric regurgitation of half written procedure, injected full of individual faux-facts and generalizations.

 

 

And thanks Dillon, I'm glad we can at least agree on one thing: that you suck at everything, as per the four words after the colon, as per your own reference. It's good to know that statement meets with your approval.

Don't like what I have to say? Don't read it, and don't reply! If you can.

Ciao for now, sugarbritches!

 

[161488303349]

---

Dirtnap Mumfuzz wrote:

 LL directs the reader in another document to review the applicable laws after a brief introduction, and contact information for filing a complaint for either situation

 

---

this part the heart of it

using a brandname say like Harley Davidson as a keyword for your own motorcycle is covered by tort law. passing off

in some legal jurisdictions (say like USA) can get further protections by register your brandname as a trademark. however under tort law which devolve from English common law (and is applicable in USA) then you can still pursue a claim in the Court even when the brandname is not registered as a trademark

link here for anyone interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_off 

+

the ToS bind us to this law and other realworld laws. by the part that says we must agree and accept the jurisdiction of the Court nominated by linden. if we want to use their service

 

[161488303349]

---

Dirtnap Mumfuzz wrote:

Don't like what I have to say? Don't read it, and don't reply! If you can.

 

---

we don't have to like it. liking is not the reason for replying. I reply so other people reading can more info/understanding of what they need be aware of in their own marketplace activities

is ok that you want to try fit your own narrow definition of what you think the law means. people do this all the time. like find something someone somewhere anywhere that gives them a definition/opinion which suits what they want to hear 

+

when getting into business (even if is only making digitals in SL) then best to research a bit. like with an open mind. and not so much go hunting for some contortion that fits your own wants. can bite you bigtime this. when find yourself involved in the big leagues. like as the defendant in a realworld court case