It's telling that no member of the Supreme Court was willing to put their name on that decision.
charonn0
joined 1 year ago
I tend to support this idea. If inputting copyrighted materials isn't infringement then neither should taking the output be.
As I've been trying to explain, confusion is not the only basis for a trademark claim.
Are you being willfully fucking obtuse?
No. And I have no interest in discussing this with you further if you can't do so respectfully.
Trademarks include words, phrases, and symbols.
Well, I'm only familiar with US law on the subject. NZ might see things differently.
But in the US, dilution of a famous mark doesn't necessarily mean confusion. For example, you couldn't use Apple's famous white apple logo even for a company that had nothing to do with technology.
Confusion isn't the only issue. There's also trademark dilution.
“The president is elected by the entire nation, and it should be the entire nation who determines who they want for president, whether they are guilty of insurrection or not,” Bobb said during an interview on Real America’s Voice. “It’s up to the people.”
When was the last time a Republican won the popular vote?
The difference, of course, is that in this case there is an actual panel and death is actually on the table.
And their Christofascist fans don't even realize it's a sin to consult a psychic.
If your business can't survive without paying slave wages then your business shouldn't survive.