Common sense loses in court again

Thrillhouse

Back from the dead
Joined
Jun 22, 2002
Posts
1,752
But the final quote is pretty funny.



http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,56432,00.html

Visa Suit: Dictionary Discredited

By Paul Boutin

Domain disputes are a dime a dozen, but legal experts say Visa's recent win over a one-man website is the first time a corporate trademark has prevailed over a word in the dictionary.

A Nevada district court found the evisa.com site run by Joe Orr of New York City could possibly dilute Visa's trademark. As shown at a mirror of the site, evisa.com offered travel and translation services, as well as multilingual presentation software.

Visa hosts its own e-visa.com site, and has pending applications for trademarks including EVisa, E-Visa, and E Visa. The company could not be reached for comment by press time.

Electronic Frontier Foundation legal director Cindy Cohn clarified the decision's relevance in an e-mail: "Apple Computer, no matter how famous it becomes, cannot restrict the use of the word 'apple' to refer to the fruit. Yet here, the court has held that the Visa credit card company can restrict the ability of Americans to use the word 'visa' to when they offer travel-related information and services."

Cohn said the EFF was considering an appeal next week.

Orr said he sympathized with the company's need to protect its trademarks, but claimed the lawsuit was simply an attempt to force him to sell his domain.

"I have valuable property, and they want it. All the legal issues are just a bunch of BS," he said.

Trademark dilution claims are an area of increasing litigation in the United States. In the past, trademarks including Frigidaire, Polaroid, Scotch Tape and Xerox were lost to the public domain, causing companies to become more proactive about protecting them.

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in the ongoing case of Victoria's Secret against a retail boutique named Victor's Little Secret.

"I don't have a lot of sympathy for that guy," Orr said. "Gimme a break."
 
Thrillhouse said:
Electronic Frontier Foundation legal director Cindy Cohn clarified the decision's relevance in an e-mail: "Apple Computer, no matter how famous it becomes, cannot restrict the use of the word 'apple' to refer to the fruit. Yet here, the court has held that the Visa credit card company can restrict the ability of Americans to use the word 'visa' to when they offer travel-related information and services."
But Apple can - and does - restrict anyone from using "apple" (or MacIntosh) to refer to computer-related services. This article's a joke. I don't know where they got their "legal experts" but I've seen this type of suit many times before.
 
From the article (emphasis mine):
"Apple Computer, no matter how famous it becomes, cannot restrict the use of the word 'apple' TO REFER TO THE FRUIT. Yet here, the court has held that the Visa credit card company can restrict the ability of Americans to use the word 'visa' to when they offer travel-related information and services."

They can certainly stop someone from selling a computer with the name "apple," but they cannot force everyone to call the fruit by some other name.
 
Thrillhouse said:
They can certainly stop someone from selling a computer with the name "apple," but they cannot force everyone to call the fruit by some other name.
Which is my point. The e-visa campaign belongs to Visa, in the context of travel services. The claim that this is "the first time a corporate trademark has prevailed over a word in the dictionary" is simply inaccurate. There are loads of single words protected by trademark, within the realm of that particular service or good. Heard of Nike?
 
Huh. I swear Visa had launched a travel wing, like American Express. Oh well. I guess Orr simply lost out because he didn't trademark his name first.
 
Hey, Thrillhouse. Your religion selector doodad says I belong to the Agnostic Church. The hell is that? I'm no half-assed agnostic.
 
Back
Top