As I've been trying to explain, confusion is not the only basis for a trademark claim.
Are you being willfully fucking obtuse?
No. And I have no interest in discussing this with you further if you can't do so respectfully.
charonn0
joined 2 years ago
Trademarks include words, phrases, and symbols.
Well, I'm only familiar with US law on the subject. NZ might see things differently.
But in the US, dilution of a famous mark doesn't necessarily mean confusion. For example, you couldn't use Apple's famous white apple logo even for a company that had nothing to do with technology.
Confusion isn't the only issue. There's also trademark dilution.
Generally, states where County Clerk is an elected position are states where county-level government is particularly important and powerful. For example, the Clerk might be in charge of elections or determining property values for tax assessment.
I don't see the court upholding wilful defiance of their own rulings.
That's kind of the point.
Clementine originally forked from Amarok 1.4 because Amarok 2.0 changed too much.
Your comment comes off as from someone who hasn't read the US Constitution before.
It wasn't. Musk was blowing hot air and offered a stupid-high share price. Twitter sued to force him to honor that price.
Depends... on... whether... the... joke... is... malicious,.. of... course.
You don't go out looking for a job dressed like that do ya? On a weekday?
I tend to support this idea. If inputting copyrighted materials isn't infringement then neither should taking the output be.