Re: [DML] Re: DMC and Trademarks

[Marc Levy <malevy_nj@xxxxxxxxx>]

You responded David, so clearly there is good reason to continue this discussion on the list.  As I said before, if you are not interested you can delete the message.

"Don't deserve"??  Can you elaborate on this?  They are somehow exempt from anyone commenting on?!  

As far as "deserve" goes, I am sure you are well aware of the history here David, and DMCH is by no means an innocent bystander.  Even if DMCH did 98% things correctly, why is it not OK to point out the 2% they did wrong?  (I don't think those are actual numbers, but wanted to demonstrate my point). Based on your comments, if their business is so important to our community, then they should be held to a higher standard. 

"entitled to"?   What if someone out there feels they are "entitled to" your home, and had the power to take it from you??  Our government sometimes does this through eminent domain.  Even if the law says it is OK, I think most of us would agree it would be unfair to you.  Right?  At least with eminent domain they give you something in return, so it is not a perfect example of what has gone on with this trademark issue.

I agree, "A healthy, profitable DMCH can only be good for the owners of Deloreans".  I don't see how the trademark has any impact on this though.  Do you think if the art work was left in the public domain (as it was for over 10 years) DMCH would not be able to do business? If so, please explain.

The question that a number of people have asked DMCH over the years still does not have an "official" answer from James or Stephen.  That is, how did they come to own the trademark(s)??

I see 3 options;

1.  They created it.  (We know this is not true)

2.  They purchased it.  If they did this, they they would have likely made sure the seller was the rightful owner (much like a title search when you buy a house), and DMCH should be able to provide us with this information.

3.  They registered it simply because no one else had.  This is the "Squatters rights" I referred to before.  


Assuming it is number 3, I am guessing David that you are saying "Squatters rights" are OK as long as you deem the squatter deserving?  or entitled?  :)



--- On Mon, 2/8/10, jtrealtywebspannet <jtrealty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Since it seems only 2 people have
> problems with this they should probably continue it off-list
> directly with James. This topic has no direct impact on
> anyone on the DML. It just seems like a way to irritate
> DMCH. IMHO they don't deserve to be treated that way. If
> anyone is entitled to use the trademarks and make money on
> it, they should. A healthy, profitable DMCH can only be good
> for the owners of Deloreans.
> David Teitelbaum
> 


      


------------------------------------

To address comments privately to the moderating team, please address:
moderators@xxxxxxxxxxx

For more info on the list, tech articles, cars for sale see www.dmcnews.com

To search the archives or view files, log in at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnewsYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    dmcnews-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    dmcnews-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    dmcnews-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/