I also understand that protecting the integrity of the forums, earning respect, random people come in and start spouting off things, I get all of that. You're protective of this forum, and the members. I don't think your reaction was one to feel so terribly bad about. So don't.
I never intended to 'speak with authority', just give what insight I could on the topic:/ I do understand your concern about trolling. I didn't take it personally. No worries.
Thanks i appreciate it - Notwithstanding i could have done it much better.
And some of these are goofy also, because it depends on which Commission on Gaming holds the license. In the US particularly, because some of the are Indian Reservation Casinos that are ran by the State Gaming Commission, some are Indian Reservation Casinos that are run by their own Tribal Gaming Commission, some are State Gaming Agencies, some are ran by a State Commission with Federal oversight....blah blah blah. That doesn't relate directly to trademark cases, but it could make a difference on who handles it I think.
Its interesting to me because i did not see anything to fuss about at the start. Now i see that there is some substance to the fuss.
Where I'm from (again,
@CHP TD I'll have to talk in code, which I know how much you love haha), if somebody made a direct replica of a local casino chip, the State Gaming Commission would take action, and it would be a state issue. However, on the other side of the state at a Tribal Casino (which the State Gaming Commission still oversees), it would be a Federal issue. I don't even know if any of that applies to this Trademark law talk. I don't know where the difference in some of those Trademark policies apply,
@pltrgyst would probably know more than me on that.
This leads me to a question. there appears to be a few jurisdictional issues. Designed in Australia (AKA copyright infringed in Australia) Made in China, Infringed in the USA.
then there is the issue of damages. So now bad are the damages. If i was a judge ruling in this case id be thinking about 2 things 1 Has the Aria trademark been used without permission. I cant see an argument that will stand up for the against. 2 then id have to work out how much harm came from it. (Also noted that judges cant make their own punishment outside what the law prescribes, and i have no idea what the USA law prescribes so i'm being a layman's judge, not a real one).
So what has the Aria lost out of it? Im struggling to see a loss here. Conversely the Aria has got lots of advertising on this site from the discussion.
Also could you imagine the bad press that would happen if any action was sought? Multi billion Corporation chases down poor aussie battler...
I see that this is a very complicated issue, and yes its pretty clear the similarities of the trade mark are striking, however I still think the harm factor is so negligible its without merit for a corporation to entertain any thought of perusing it.
But i dont think that that is what this is all about.
I really think its about an opinion, that opinion is based on a persons values - weather you think Person A should have or should not have done this. And any time values are challenged emotions come to the front. Mine did.
You care or you don't. The law is not flexible, Opinions are. You like tribute chips or you don't.
To me this is kind of 2 fleas arguing over a dog. The dog doesn't care. the 2 fleas can coexist and not run out of dog.
In some ways the whole discussion is a bit silly and some of this discussion is completely serious.
But none of it is easy or simple.
I still like the chips... I totally understand why you could hate them.
Life Hey!
Ps i have to change my signature to "Rules Nit"