unbelieveable deja vu

That is an interesting question seeing as Nathan recently gave that 'someone' a good ream on a cross post....

Hmmmmm......

Mike

It's gone... he has removed it for legal reasons I'd say. JimG

People weren't being kind to DC.

I did my small part to vent. [Note: some may find this objectionable, it contains a Nazi reference.]

It is a parody on DC's actions in the past two years to wipe out fair use of it's trademarks in a number of civil legal actions based more on their ability to bully individuals with their cooperate might rather than any legal standing. They lost their case against GM and AM-General who were able to pay legal the fees to stand up to DC. Nathan and others are not so fortunate.

H> It's gone... he has removed it for legal reasons I'd say.

Hey Nathan, a suggestion...redesign the grille on the sticker to have horizontal slots instead of vertical slots, a'la M151 "Mutt"...they were more prone to rollover anyway. You could get adhesive inserts to cover the grille on your existing stickers and D-C wouldn't be able to argue that the vehicle depicted is a Jeep since Jeep never built the Mutts...unless they bought that trademark as well...

• * * Matt Macchiarolo
  formatting link
  formatting link
  formatting link

• * * Matt Macchiarolo
  formatting link
  formatting link
  formatting link

I'm just curious as to what Nathan was thinking? Nothing against him, and I certainly can't say I like DC's stance, but this just didn't seem to be a good sense thing to do. They had already busted his chops over trademark issues and proven themselves MORE than willing to destroy his life. He had to know that odds are they would keep tabs on him. This sticker thing just seems to me to be a bad way to tempt fate. With that said, hell I thought they were neat and would have been more than happy to buy a few.

Whatever the case, hopefully it has already run it's course and he can continue his life without fear of more litigation. I know all about that crap believe me. Only the lawyers win....

I thought the sales proceeds only covered postage ?

Dave Milne

IANAL, not even in an armchair. Having said that, making a profit or a loss on something doesn't enter into it when it come to trademark protection. Like it or not, DC is obligated to vigorously defend its trademarks from dilution, in the same way that Kleenex, Xerox and Velcro must. If they fail to defend the marks from unauthorized use they risk losing them.

Of course, that doesn't mean that they are obligated to be nasty about it, and DC certainly seems to be taking the nasty route whenever possible.

Here's a quick primer on trademark. Keyword search for "infringement".

What happened to the topic? I just got back from a business trip followed by a family holiday and I went to read the link. All I get is the default topic list... I'm missing out! :(

I think Nathan may have deleted the entire topic for legal reasons.

Tom

So... What's going on? Is he getting sued over those stickers?

Just a cease and desist order.

JimG

They sent him a letter via UPS to cease and desist, that he was in violation of his Orders from the previous suit and that he must destroy all existing stock. Seems the Storm Troopers at DC Legal have nothing left to do but beat up on it's Jeep fans.

Sieg Heil!

TJim wrote:

twaldron did pass the time by typing:

Hmm.. How about if he gives them away? I promise to dispose of them by personally seeing they are left at various locations around the US. :)

As I understand it Nathan's settlement with DC was a valid order, which he signed willingly. Instead of accepting that he lost the original dispute and moving on, he persists in trying to see how close he can get to violating the terms of that order without actually doing so. His behavior suggests that he never meant to abide by the spirit and letter of the order, so why did he sign it?

"Vivir en miedo es vivir a medias." --Strictly Ballroom, excellent movie, apropos

Earle