On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 21 of 35:
Next »
« Previous
Buzz! Wrong! Thank you for playing!
You really should learn the maxim "It is better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Apparently you have no idea how trademark law works.

First, it is VERY hard to prove abandonment of a trademark. Second, they don't have to "defend" their trademark as simply using it will suffice.

You see, the way trademark law works is it provides you with ownership of intellectual property. In other words, the fine folks at Jarg create a piece of programming which they trademark. It's now their's and their's alone.

Now, say that they later discover the Google is using their software. It makes no difference when they notice this. I am unsure as to whether or not there is a statue from once they realize that there has been trademark infringement to the time they apply for a resolution via the courts.

That would be called a "statute of limitations" which again proves that you know little of what you comment on. Google states they have not been served yet so this hasn't even gone to trial yet.

That said, if Google did use the intellectual property of another with out their approval then who are you to say that the other party should not be granted their due? I highly doubt you would feel the same were you in their role.
Posted by: Magicman73   Posted on: 11/13/07 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

What a Target  Tim Patterson | 11/11/07
What they meant was ...  Henaway | 11/11/07
Sorry, the law doesn't work that way.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/12/07
We'll see  Tim Patterson | 11/12/07
On that we agree.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/12/07
Patents protect rights.  Magicman73 | 11/13/07
You've got that one wrong.  AbbydonKrafts | 11/13/07
Required to defend  maybejunk01@... | 11/12/07
A Fine Ideal  Mahegan | 11/12/07
Statute of Limitations.  Magicman73 | 11/13/07
I have to agree with No_Axe...  djchandler | 11/12/07
None of which  frgough | 11/12/07
Misunderstand  Tim Patterson | 11/12/07
Junk???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/12/07
Junk patents  coyoteman@... | 11/14/07
Yeah, universities are such patent trolls...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/12/07
Universities patents  philipj@... | 11/12/07
SOMETHING BACK NO  shawn@... | 11/12/07
Why can't universities patent work?  lostark98 | 11/12/07
Interesting statement I think...  D-Ram | 11/12/07
Buzz! Wrong! Thank you for playing!  Magicman73 | 11/13/07
Trademark??!!!  Dr. John | 11/13/07
Infoseek  IT_Critic | 11/12/07
The memories!  AbbydonKrafts | 11/13/07
Northeastern sues Google over search patent  Loverock Davidson | 11/12/07
Difference between publish date and Patent  THEE WOLF | 11/12/07
RE: Northeastern sues Google over search patent  Ripley8 | 11/12/07
RE: Northeastern sues Google over search patent  tryreadingme@... | 11/12/07
Private Institution  fox.ryanj | 11/12/07
What are you talking about?  Magicman73 | 11/13/07
This is OUR PRIOR ART, hands off!!!  wwwsupport | 11/13/07
RE: Northeastern sues Google over search patent  werner2k_z | 11/13/07
Wouldn't that be something.  AbbydonKrafts | 11/13/07
Law and court  Altotus | 11/13/07
What?  AbbydonKrafts | 11/13/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here