Current Insight Community Cases

Justifying Your Datacenter Management Improvements

Essential Datacenter Tips On Application Performance Monitoring

The Importance Of Skilled Immigrants To The American Economy

Help A New Kind of Music Label Revolutionize The Industry

Mandates To Buy American Should Be More Carefully Considered

Shut Us Up

-- For Only $100 Million

Brought to you by Floor64 and the Techdirt crew.

stories filed under: "air freshener"
Too Much Free Time

Too Much Free Time

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
advertising, air freshener, trademark

Companies:
little trees



Little Trees Air Freshener Company Ads Warn People Not To Mess With Its Trademark

from the seems-a-bit-proactive dept

We've seen a variety of overly aggressive actions concerning trademarks lately that go well beyond the stated purpose (and the letter of the law) concerning trademarks. However, one of our readers, BendWeather, sent in something we hadn't seen before. He was reading the latest (paper) copy of PhotoShop User Magazine and discovered the following advertisement:

Little-Trees-Ad
Now, I have no problem with the company, Little Trees, that makes those "car-fresheners" enforcing their trademarks when there's a real violation of the trademark, but it seems quite odd to become so proactive that you would take out an ad specifically warning people that it's a trademark violation "no matter how you use it." That, of course, is false and a misstatement of trademark law... as is the information on Little Trees' own web page about its trademark, where the company incorrectly claims that "the law requires that we take action when someone is using them without permission."

That is not true. The law requires that a trademark holder actively police infringement on its trademarks and activity that would likely cause confusion or dilution of the trademark. That does not mean any use that is without permission. For example, in writing this post about Little Trees' trademark policy we did not ask permission, nor should we need it, since we are commenting on the policy itself. We are not competing with the company, confusing anyone as to the origins of the mark, or diluting the value of the mark, unless you consider explaining how the company is overly stating the rights associated with the mark as diminishing its value (which would be quite the legal argument).

Also, in looking at the ad, the company is being somewhat misleading in claiming that the image is "private property." It is not. It is covered by trademark, which is not the same thing as private property, and the company is doing a disservice to everyone claiming that they are the same thing.

35 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Search Techdirt
And now, a word from our Sponsors..



Popular Posts
Poll

Which Internet Concern Worries You The Most?

 

 

 

 

 

 


Add Techdirt RSS To Your Reader
rss Add Techdirt to your Bloglines
Add Techdirt to your Google Add Techdirt to your My Yahoo
Add Techdirt to your Netvibes Add Techdirt to your Newsgator
Subscribe to Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Older Stuff

Monday

10:23am: One Misguided Tweet Is 'Indisputable' Evidence That Piracy Harms Movies? (61)
9:10am: Italian Prosecutors Assume Google Execs Read All YouTube Comments; Demands Jailtime Over Video (32)
7:33am: Copyright Law Changes In India Could Gut Fair Use (18)
6:00am: UK Pub Owner Fined Due To Unauthorized Downloads On Free Pub WiFi? (41)
3:57am: Suing For Patent Infringement No Replacement For Actually Building A Real Business (30)
1:46am: Mininova Deletes Most Torrents Under Court Threat (49)

Wednesday

7:37pm: Stop Wallowing And Start Doing Cool Stuff With Business Models, The Wil Wheaton Edition (32)
6:51pm: Researchers: Copying And Imitation Is Good For Society (140)
6:05pm: Steve Jobs Tells Startup Startup To Change Names, Saying 'It's No Big Deal' (69)
5:26pm: Profitable 'Pay Us Or We'll Sue You For File Sharing' Scheme About To Send 30,000 More Letters (20)
4:46pm: UK Police Arresting People Just To Add To DNA Database? (18)
4:01pm: Funny How Those In Favor Of ACTA Are Against Treaty Providing More Access To Content For Vision Impaired (6)
3:15pm: Advertising As Content: Newspaper Raising Newsstand Prices For Thanksgiving Papers With Black Friday Ads (11)
2:14pm: Are Entertainment Industry Tactics Working? (50)
1:00pm: Photographer Compares Microstock Sites To Pollution And Drug Dealing (45)
11:48am: If Movie Piracy Is Really A Problem, It's Hollywood's Fault (78)
10:27am: If Google Visitors Are Worthless, It's Only Because Newspaper Execs Don't Know What They're Doing (37)
9:01am: Multitasking Is Our Main Activity (15)
7:33am: Greed vs. Due Diligence: Another Case Of Startup Fraud? (4)
6:01am: Anti-Piracy Group In Spain Fined For Bad Faith Actions Against File Sharing Systems (13)
3:55am: ABA Journal's Patent Application To Score Interview With USPTO Boss David Kappos (18)
1:44am: Can Universities Make Sure That Drugs Based On Their Research Are Licensed Reasonably? (19)

Tuesday

9:21pm: Companies Realizing That Content Is Advertising Via Web Series (12)
7:01pm: Could You Prove That The Government Was Watching You Illegally? (38)
4:56pm: Reuters, AP Refuse To Cover Cricket Matches Over Restrictive Press Accreditation Rules (21)
3:21pm: Comparing File Sharing To Payola: Could Have Had That Promotion For Free (34)
1:56pm: Jury Says Fictional Character Can Be Libelous (28)
12:44pm: Spam King Alan Ralsky Gets Four Years In Jail (28)
11:39am: Publishers Getting The Wrong Message Over eBook Piracy (39)
10:28am: Calling For An Independent Invention Defense In Patents (28)
More arrow
Quick Links
Close
E-mail It