| Hello again! [message #99807] |
Fri, 01 August 2008 04:27  |
Chad Lovell
Messages: 2 Registered: August 2008
|
Junior Member |
|
|
nothing secured under the
word "avidrecording." No products, trademarks, fixed medium or not,
tangible or intangible. Notta.
I might add, I am surprised having found "hotguitartracks" available as .com
..net and .org
Mark
"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:C500433F.60B%lendan@bigpond.net.au...
> Hey Mark.
> There's some nice sounds there.
> How have you managed to not be sued by Digidesign yet?
>
> Martin H
> Lend An Ear SoundI don't think I've been counted, but I've had a Paris System for several years
now. I have two EDS-1000s, MEC, C-16, two 8-Ins, one IF-2, and Paris 3.0.
BTHi Mark, I wish you the best but I'm not sure about the avidrecording name
not infringing. I owned "microsoftsuperstore.com" for a few months and then
decided that i would be sued or something. My non-existent law knowledge
led me to believe that even if it's similar in the same market then it's
actionable. Like if I did AvidTennisShoes.com then there is no chance they
will lose market share from customer confusion. My impression was that if
it was arguable that a customer in the same market could be confused then
it was actionable.
John
www.nikesocks.com
heheYes, that's pretty much what I thought.
It isn't "actual", it's "intent".
I must say, when I saw the name at first, I immediately thought of "Avid"
(Digi), so I can't have been the first, (or the last).
Have you had 'Top shelf" legal advice on this?
Martin H
On 25/09/08 7:55 AM, in article 48dab757$1@linux, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Mark, I wish you the best but I'm not sure about the avidrecording name
> not infringing. I owned "microsoftsuperstore.com" for a few months and then
> decided that i would be sued or something. My non-existent law knowledge
> led me to believe that even if it's similar in the same market then it's
> actionable. Like if I did AvidTennisShoes.com then there
|
|
|
|