3 ms·
Why 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 protec
by CWuestefeld 13y ago
Why 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.