7 ms·
It's true that most cease-and-desist letters contain awful legalese, but here's a great example of a well-written, classy one: https://brokenpianoforpresident.f
by hawkharris 13y ago
It's true that most cease-and-desist letters contain awful legalese, but here's a great example of a well-written, classy one: https://brokenpianoforpresident.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/jd-letter-entire-big1.jpg https://brokenpianoforpresident.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/...
- tlrobinson 13y agoWow, that nearly brought a tear to my eye (which probably says more about past abusive C&Ds I've seen than this one in particular)
- michaelhoffman 13y agoWhat's nice about that one is it appears to fulfill their obligation to show that they are policing unauthorized uses of their trademark without causing any real harm to anyone else.
- GhotiFish 13y agowow. It's amazing how phrasing and tone can change your posture and make your compliant or resistant to demands. A form of mental/monetary Judo. Thanks for the example.
- codezero 13y agoUnfortunately, it looks like such kindly worded cease and desist orders do not actually produce results, the person here doesn't appear to have changed the cover of the book at all. http://www.amazon.com/dp/1621050203 http://www.amazon.com/dp/1621050203
- LukeShu 13y agoThat page is for the first edition of the book.
- masklinn 13y agoIndeed, here is the second edition: http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Piano-President-Patrick-Wensink/dp/1621050521/ref=tmm_pap_title_1 http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Piano-President-Patrick-Wensink...
- codezero 13y agoAwesome, thanks for the info. He still didn't remove the obvious branding ties all over his website, but at least he did change the physical cover, I'm still not convinced it worked out as well as JD would have liked.
- CWuestefeld 13y agoWhy does JD have a trademark claim here in the first place? AIUI, trademark is not a tool to protect the manufacturer/seller of a product, but a tool to protect the consumer, to help them avoid confusion in believing that a similar-looking product is from the brand "owning" the trademark. How can a book (especially an ebook!) be confused as a Jack Daniels product? Surely the purchaser has no expectation that they'll be able to drink from the book. My understanding is that similar names in unrelated industries do not clash over trademark. For example, Gibson Guitars and Gibson performance cat-back exhausts are so vastly different (despite both making sweet sounds) that nobody is going to be confused
- ianferrel 13y agoYou can buy a Jack Daniels T-shirt with the label printed on it. Presumably, no one thinks they can drink a T-shirt, but the product is produced by (or at least licensed by) Jack Daniels.
- CWuestefeld 13y agoIf the controversy were over copyrights (presumably JD holds a copyright on their label), where the book cover reproduces that copyrighted work, then I'd get it. The T-shirt would be subject to the same copyright concerns, and need to license the image. But the referenced letter explicitly says it's a trademark issue. I can't see how consumers are potentially confused between a book bearing a particular product on its cover, and that product itself.
- ianferrel 13y agoIf the average person understood the vagaries of intellectual property law and the distinction between copyright and trademark, then a swoopy design that looks a lot like the Jack Daniels label wouldn't cause confusion in the marketplace.