I agree with you that there really isn't any chance of market confusion. I just simply wanted to add a detail that refuted any argument that said that Monster Energy isn't in the video game business so therefore they shouldn't be allowed to bully.
I'm certainly not in favor of Monster Energy's bullying tactics. However, I think it's worth pointing out there actually is a Monster Energy Supercross video game that has been published. Given that they do have a presence in this industry, it adds a little more legitimacy to their opposition to the trademark filing.
I've been complaining for years that Amazon should not be allowed to have their buttons say purchase or buy now for digital goods but instead say rent or acquire a license. I realize it is semantics, but it is unethical for them to mislead buyers into thinking they own something that can disappear or lose access to at anytime. And I write this as a content creator that has had to switch publishers and distributors for one of my films and watched it disappear off platforms out of my control.
Better yet. If there wasn't a copyright notice appended to the original broadcast when it aired, then it should technically be in the public domain because of the (then) copyright formality requirements back in 1967
Yes, I meant the 14+14, and the extension is not an automatic renewal. This will help prevent orphan works and will bring back the original intent of inspiring others. I mean, you don't allow patents to be renewed for hundreds of years, so why should media be different?
So you're saying that things like The Hunger Games, Twilight, Gangnam Style, and other things that became cultural sensations within the last 20 years should be public domain? Then there would be no incentive to make any product that cost significant amounts of money as anybody could monetize it, which meant that those who financed it would rarely if ever see their money back.
I'm fine with the original copyright terms (pre-Sonny Bono extensions) applying to all media, so that things like Mickey Mouse should now be in public domain.
The framing at the end of this article about the eventual popularity of the original creation reminds me of Shepherd Fairey's use of a Getty photo that likely would never have been seen or used again, and he transformed it into a new artwork that became iconic (the "HOPE" poster). He shouldn't have lied about where he got the photo and/or deleted evidence, but clearly there wasn't a huge market for Getty for that specific photo PRIOR to Fairey's derivative work.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Tostie14.
Re: Re: There is a Monster Energy videogame
I agree with you that there really isn't any chance of market confusion. I just simply wanted to add a detail that refuted any argument that said that Monster Energy isn't in the video game business so therefore they shouldn't be allowed to bully.
There is a Monster Energy videogame
I'm certainly not in favor of Monster Energy's bullying tactics. However, I think it's worth pointing out there actually is a Monster Energy Supercross video game that has been published. Given that they do have a presence in this industry, it adds a little more legitimacy to their opposition to the trademark filing.
This. So much this.
I've been complaining for years that Amazon should not be allowed to have their buttons say purchase or buy now for digital goods but instead say rent or acquire a license. I realize it is semantics, but it is unethical for them to mislead buyers into thinking they own something that can disappear or lose access to at anytime. And I write this as a content creator that has had to switch publishers and distributors for one of my films and watched it disappear off platforms out of my control.
Re: Valid Copyright
Better yet. If there wasn't a copyright notice appended to the original broadcast when it aired, then it should technically be in the public domain because of the (then) copyright formality requirements back in 1967
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, I meant the 14+14, and the extension is not an automatic renewal. This will help prevent orphan works and will bring back the original intent of inspiring others. I mean, you don't allow patents to be renewed for hundreds of years, so why should media be different?
Re:
So you're saying that things like The Hunger Games, Twilight, Gangnam Style, and other things that became cultural sensations within the last 20 years should be public domain? Then there would be no incentive to make any product that cost significant amounts of money as anybody could monetize it, which meant that those who financed it would rarely if ever see their money back.
I'm fine with the original copyright terms (pre-Sonny Bono extensions) applying to all media, so that things like Mickey Mouse should now be in public domain.
Derivative Works
The framing at the end of this article about the eventual popularity of the original creation reminds me of Shepherd Fairey's use of a Getty photo that likely would never have been seen or used again, and he transformed it into a new artwork that became iconic (the "HOPE" poster). He shouldn't have lied about where he got the photo and/or deleted evidence, but clearly there wasn't a huge market for Getty for that specific photo PRIOR to Fairey's derivative work.