Mr. Garner is a “SMUCK” selling T-shirts over the internet from Thailand to fund his perverted habit and exploitation of little boys and girls for sex.

This is a real bad guy.. folks…….

can’t agree more, thats why Robertson (Lindows) should ultimatel;y triumph over the trademark infring. case with Windows.

can a word get any more generic than Window? Too bad a judge didnt poll a jury the same way back then before Win 3.11. “When you hear the word Window, do you think of a comp OS or a view port covered in glass?” I think we all know what the answer would have been back then. Glad the court decided to scrutinize this case from a perspective of back then rather than now, as MS wanted

You CAN Trademark it! You Shouldn’t be Able To, but you frequently can. Another from sports … In the world of skydiving, for example, a popular “freeflyer” (which is to say, ‘freeflying” had been used as a name of an aerial discipline for a decade or more, where people fly their bodies in a mainly vertical attitude as opposed to a horizontal one) applied for a trademark on the word “freefly” and got it. Even though, (to skydivers) it was just about one of the most common words in the language. Course, enforcement is a bitch, but does succeed in wasting lots of everyone’s time.

Lexus vs Lexus.

A car company complaining that a small fruit canning company was infringing on their trademarked brand name.

The judge basically ended the case by asking the court audience to hold up their hands to the following options. “When you hear Lexus; do you think of a car or a can of peaches?” The car was more popular… case dismissed!

Personally a common phrase makes for a poor choice of trademark or brand name, and is actually not legitimate as such. For example yone could not create a company and trademark the name of “open for business”. “In the Zone” is a common phrase in reference to sports, and therefore should not qualify as a trademarkable brandname. The more common the phrase or name the more difficult to enforce.

ref: http://cobrands.business.findlaw.com/intellectual_property/nolo/faq/CEDEFCC8-4998-4C6C-8C1A189769480100.html

I’m surprised the RIAA hasn’t exposed some loophole or pushed more legislation through to make them exempt from any copyright infringment cases (like the anti-competiitive exemption they enjoy)