The Hyundai commercial did attempt to brand the basketball so that it resembled the LV trademarked design.
The gold-colored shapes are on a brown, leather-type surface. This is the same as the well-known image of LV bags.
They did use the stylized LV. It is directly above the base of the thumb next to the seam of the basketball.
The gold-colored bullseye-looking shapes and crosses are almost identical to the circles and crosses used in the trademarked LV bags.
And despite what you may think is asinine, the court is actually the final judge.
But suppose a commercial for a LV handbag was to show a toy car with a Hyundai logo on it driving into an LV bag.
Let's say the commercial made the statement that everyone wants to live in an LV world.
I guarantee you that Hyundai would have sued to keep LV from using the Hyundai logo without permission.
And one of the points would have been that people might be confused that Hyundai was making toy cars.
I'm getting tired of TechDirt's attempts to confuse its readers (and obviously Anonymous Coward, you are very confused) as to the rights companies have to keep others from using and abusing their logos and trademarks.
For some reason the telescreen in the living-room was in an unusual position. Instead of being placed, as was normal, in the end wall, where it could command the whole room, it was in the longer wall, opposite the window. To one side of it there was a shallow alcove in which Winston was now sitting, and which, when the flats were built, had probably been intended to hold bookshelves. By sitting in the alcove, and keeping well back, Winston was able to remain outside the range of the telescreen, so far as sight went. He could be heard, of course, but so long as he stayed in his present position he could not be seen. It was partly the unusual geography of the room that had suggested to him the thing that he was now about to do.
The bikini Beyoncé wears looks very much like something someone put together after they saw the German one.
But it also looks like someone specifically put together to be similar to the German one but with enough changes as to make it different enough to pass a test in court.
This is very similar to what we used to do in advertising when we wrote a song that sounded very much like a popular song but was just different enough so that we didn't get killed in court.
However, our lawyers always warned us never to contact the original song's publisher for the rights to the pop song. They told us the courts might construe it was if we did contact the publisher and they quoted a high price to use the song, we created a knockoff to get away without paying the fees.
So Beyoncé's video staff might have contacted the German designer. Then, when they said no or wanted too much money, the video staff decided to go for a knockoff.
That's the kind of situation that starts to look bad for the video staff.
It's a little easier to understand the reason behind the collection societies demands (I may understand, but I don't agree with them) when you realize that many, many, MANY years ago, live music was found everywhere.
Fine hotels would have live musicians playing in their lobby restaurants, tea parlors, and ballrooms.
Even the lowly local bar had a live piano player pumping out a lively tune to keep the atmosphere happy and gay (in the older sense of the word).
Then, when recorded music and music systems were installed in these places, musicians were out of jobs. The musicians felt they lost their jobs to recorded music which many places felt could be played for free.
That's when the record industry as well as the musicians unions and other guilds came up with the idea that playing a record in a public place was the same as a public performance. So, while the musicians would no longer collect their salary for playing "live" they would still be compensated by getting a public performance fee.
It might not have been as much as a live, paying gig, but considering that the musician actually didn't have to do any work, the performance fee seemed like a great idea.
Two years ago my father died. At the small family gathering we had in the funeral parlour I played one of his favorite songs as people left the room.
Strictly speaking it was indeed a public performance and I had evaded hiring a live musician. I should have also sent some sort of royalty payment to ASCAP or BMI.
I think going into prisons is way overboard. But if restaurants and bars have to pay royalties for their jukeboxes and piped-in music, I can see the rationale for the prisons.
And as far as hairdressers go, where do you think we got the phrase "Barbershop Quartet?"
It's not an outrageous expectation of being paid. But it does sound strange to our 21st Century world.
Rather than rely on a coin toss (which has always been easy to manipulate), it is better to use a random number generator.
However, recently I discovered that the random numbers generated by computers and smart phone applications aren't as random as you would want. They use mathematical formulas which are generated in a predictable way.
However, Random.org is a great resource as they generate random numbers, flip virtual coins, roll virtual die, and shuffle virtual cards using atmospheric noise. They believe this is a better way to create random events.