[pp.int.general] trademarks

[teirdes at gmail.com]

Dear Reinier!

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 07:53:42AM +0200, Reinier Bakels wrote:
> There is apparently some confusion about trademarks in PP circles.
> Are trademarks basically OK? Yes and no.

For franchising agreements, they are certainly okay.

The consumer protection aspects of trademarks I feel are better
covered by other types of legislation, say, the Unfair Business
Practises directive.

If information, or brands, are to be capitalised, sure, trademarks is
a pre-requisite, but it's otherwisse not that difficult to imagine a
brand takeover by for instance taking over the firm assets (like
production facilities or whatever) of the brand at hand, instead of
also purchasing their trademark.

I feel trademarks do not appear to be a good idea. At the very least
we need to reform the legislation surrounding them and amend some of
the practises at our trademark registrar offices.

The above text is probably influenced by the political idea that
information doesn't really require a market, at least not one remotely
close to the one we have today. 

/amelia

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20100410/ca3547ff/attachment.pgp>