[pp.int.general] trademarks

[teirdes at gmail.com]

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 02:15:45PM +0200, Reinier Bakels wrote:
> >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
> 
> Let me be straight: I don't think that generally trademarks are an
> issue that deserves political priority (except from some details I
> have listed in my post earlier today).
> 
> Tradmarks insofar are different from (most) other forms of
> "intellectuel property" (sorry, RMS!) that they only indirectly
> relate to trade in information ("market in information"). Trademarks
> serve the purpose of *identification*. Which - to some extent -
> benefits the consumer. Yes, identification requires exclusivity. It
> is almost philosophical.
>

At "my level" (EU) or whatever, we are mostly stuck working with texts
the Commission finds suitable for us to work with, so trademarks may
well come up as a political issue. This holds true also in, say,
Swedish parliament or the Dutch parliament - if they start
investigations in trademark law at government level, there is no need
for us not to bother ourselves with them.

Is it campaign material? Well, perhaps not. 

A coherent policy against capitalisation of information is not
objectable though. It's the difference between an ideological
statement and a pragmatic one (ref.: Swedish socialdemocrats are
ideologically republicans, but do not actively strive to remove the
King - this is probably also fortunate because the King is quite
popular in Sweden).
 
> someone elses reputation. But isn't that natural? I like the name
> "Amelia", but I can't call myself Amelia. (but I would get very
> tired typing Andersdotter all the time- twice the number of letters
> of my surname).
> 

Yes, and that makes no sense at all.

Personal names are a very bad method of identifying people. My
name is held by 1729 in total in Sweden. Granted, my surname is
probably rather unique, but imagine people called Lars (101382
occurrences in total) Andersson (260280 occurrences).

Given the fact that people get nicknames as well (mine was universally
"Mattie" for 12 years or so - it disappeared only when I moved from
Uppsala to Lund in 2006, and even then it re-emerges when I go back to
Uppsala), it makes considerably more sense to identify people with
something like, say, a personal ID number and then let people call
themselves whatever they want.

It also costs money to change your name in Sweden. Stupid.

Of course, it's arguable that a personal ID number would also be a
form of trademark. 

/amelia

> BTW an anecdote: our future queen (born 2003) is called AmAlia (http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharina-Amalia_av_Nederl%C3%A4nderna),
> named after a 17th century princess
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amalia_of_Solms-Braunfels). There is a
> special office in NL (I don't recall its name right now) that caters
> for registering brand- and domain names in the short period of time
> between the moment hat a new prince(ss) is born and the moment that
> its name is announced. Otherwise there would be a rush afterwards,
> by al kinds of firms who want to borrow from some kind of "royal"
> image.
> 
> Fortunately, there is a special provision in trademark law that
> allows everyone to continue to use its own name even if its is
> registered as a trademark!
> 
> reinier
> 
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
-------------- 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/20100410/97ad081b/attachment.pgp>