Posted by Wayne Parham [ 67.66.228.230 ] on February 25, 2004 at 01:06:19:
In Reply to: Re: esattamente posted by Bill Martinelli on February 24, 2004 at 22:21:38:
I've seen some really strange things in my experiences with intellectual property laws. Some made sense, but others didn't. Lots of PTO enforcement actions are counterintuitive.
Frankly, when I see public discussions about IP issues, I realize that what is being discussed is general ideas about what people think is "fair" and what is not. I know that's the level where I'm most comfortable. Where it gets funny, is when people start talking about what they think is law.
I'm here to tell you, if an opinion about a matter of IP law is rendered by someone that isn't a practicing PTO attorney, that opinion is completely useless. It may be an interesting opinion, but it is probably not valid in respect to the law. Even if the person making the opinion is an attorney - If they aren't specialized in dealing with the PTO, they might as well be selling ice cream on the corner.
So I think I agree with you and everyone else here that maybe having some mechanism for sampling an entertainment product might be a good idea. But I also wanted to throw in the thought that there might be more at stake for some of the IP owners than just the profit motive. There could be much more serious potential liabilities that many of us don't know to consider.
[ General Forum ] [ Help ]