>In terms of trademarks, it simply isn't illegal to mention the product by its trademarked name, so no defense is necessary in the first place as it is not even

>In terms of trademarks, it simply isn't illegal to mention the product by its trademarked name, so no defense is necessary in the first place as it is not even a valid charge. Exactly, see my quote: "I have to agree the DMCA Notice seems to be embarrassingly improper as an attempt to enforce alleged TM violations." >Subsequent followup by the company indicates they may have a valid IP claim on other materials That is exactly why I included the hypothetical legal analysis to assume arguendo that the TMs are also CR[1] or simply other material was CR. See: "Even assuming the TMs above were actually CRs, it would still be improper to try to enforce a CR when the "alleged" infringement is obviously permissible under the Fair Use Doctrine." [1] It is not common that a TM to be related and identical to a Copyright - here is an example Nirvana may have a TM for their band name "Nirvana", but may hold CR for their self titled album "Nirvana".