You act like getting informed on the law is somehow contrary to hiring a lawyer, which is especially bizarre, since most of the advice was phrased as "in my exp

You act like getting informed on the law is somehow contrary to hiring a lawyer, which is especially bizarre, since most of the advice was phrased as "in my experience X is likely to happen, but you should consult with a lawyer". Is it wrong to try to be informed of the law (when ignorance is rarely an excuse)? To find out what rights a trademark or a domain name confer? Or to list precedent and examples, such as nissan.com? We should just stick our heads in the sand, resign ourselves to total ignorance and helplessness, and let the lawyers do all the thinking? Lets make this specific. Look at this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29522196 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29522196 Are you saying every part of that comment, except for "This is probably not DIY territory; consult a lawyer knowledgable about trademark law to help you determine how to respond." is wrong? For example, is the following statement wrong in the U.S.? > Just like patents have a concept of "prior art," trademarks have a concept of "first use in commerce."