<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Words Fail</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/07/words-fail/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/07/words-fail/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:09:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Thompson</title>
		<link>http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/07/words-fail/#comment-13463</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:12:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=6447#comment-13463</guid>
		<description>I saw that last night, started to write a comment on it, but didn&#039;t finish for some reason.  

Anyhow, the scary thing is that Guiness&#039; actions may well be on firm legal footing under UK trademark law.  AFAIK, the UK does not have an equivalent of the fair use defense and it&#039;s trademark laws are notoriously overprotective - they&#039;re why the McMahon, Inc. is no longer able to call itself WWF; had that case been brought in the US, it would have gotten laughed out of court on grounds that there was no likelihood of confusion.  

Additionally, a big part of the reason why there&#039;s a fair use defense in US trademark law is that we have the First Amendment.  There is not generally a UK equivalent.  

I&#039;m just not sure that Failblog would be subject to UK trademark jurisdiction, which is outside the scope of my knowledge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw that last night, started to write a comment on it, but didn&#8217;t finish for some reason.  </p>
<p>Anyhow, the scary thing is that Guiness&#8217; actions may well be on firm legal footing under UK trademark law.  AFAIK, the UK does not have an equivalent of the fair use defense and it&#8217;s trademark laws are notoriously overprotective &#8211; they&#8217;re why the McMahon, Inc. is no longer able to call itself WWF; had that case been brought in the US, it would have gotten laughed out of court on grounds that there was no likelihood of confusion.  </p>
<p>Additionally, a big part of the reason why there&#8217;s a fair use defense in US trademark law is that we have the First Amendment.  There is not generally a UK equivalent.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;m just not sure that Failblog would be subject to UK trademark jurisdiction, which is outside the scope of my knowledge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
