RE: [dvd-discuss] 120 years and still not in the public domain

[Michael A Rolenz <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>]

And I was not disagreeing,but  just pointing out that it was not a patent or copyright issue but a trademark issue which actually HAS no public domain and potentially no time limits. Even if a trademark is not in use and the fees not paid, the public does NOT have a right to use the trademark. When trademarks are used on reproductions it is called fraud - one such lucrative market is forged antiques. For example, a number of very nice forgeries of TIffin Glass canes is reputed to be coming out of Asia complete with TIffin trademarks. The only want to tell them a part is to look for a couple of mistakes they made in the copy. 

As for how this is a trademark issue, the question is what's the legal argument and  I'd bet money that the legal argument is a tortured reading of a series of cases that together are about as sturdy as a 2x4 made from scrap lumber with nails and Elmer's Glue (a registered trademark...and used in this instance since most people would not understand what I meant by casein glue).

The issue is what do the owners of the DDC provide? IAre they providing a standardized cataloging system of books for cross references between libraries? That's a SERVICE not a trademark. f I don't pay their $500/year do they sue me for continuing to use the DDC? 

What would be choice is if a judge rules that they have no patent, copyright, and their service is not a trademark (although they can claim to be the official publisher of DDC classifications) and that their little bit of intellectual property extortion is ended.

Maybe a better phrase should be "Intellectual Extortion" rather than "Intellectual Property"

"Dean Sanchez" <DSANCHEZ@fcci-group.com> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu 10/02/2003 09:48 AM Please respond to dvd-discuss

To:        <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>         cc:        <owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>         Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] 120 years and still not in the public domain

My point was how could it be trademark infringement to use the system?  Is every category and number in the system is trademarked?  If it's possible to trademark every term in a system or process, what's to prevent me from writing a book and trademarking every sentence?  Or trademarking the titles such as  'Chapter 1', etc?  If that is the case, trademark everything and forgo the patent or copyright.
 
If you go to http://www.libraryhotel.com/
 
You will see, under the concepts link, the floor and room names.  For example:
 
3rd.floor: Social Sciences
Room#  
300.001 Communication  
300.002 Political Science
300.003 Economics
300.004 World Culture
300.005 Money
300.006 Law
 
The hotel is not claiming to be the Dewey Decimal Hotel.  I could (almost) see that being trademark infringement.  However, I fail to see how using the sytem is trademark infringement.
 
Continuing your analogy of 'Kleenex' .  Putting tissues in a box using the same technique as 'Kleenex' should not be trademark infringement.  Patent infringement if there was a valid patent on the technique, but not trademark infringement.
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu]On Behalf Of Michael A Rolenz
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:40 AM
To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Cc: Dvd Discussion Group (E-mail); owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] 120 years and still not in the public domain


It's not copyright but trademark infringement : 
"Now the library group is suing the Library Hotel, accusing it of trademark  infringement. " 

This may wind up having (or should) the same status as Kleenex. Yes "Kleenex" is a trademark but it is also something used so commonly that it is now a word. Having someone say "give me a Kleenex" in a film should be considered free advertising rather than trademark infringement whereas putting "Kleenex" on a box of paper tissues made by someone else would be infringement since one would be confusing the real "kleenex" with a competitors. I seriously doubt that ANY one would confuse the DDC in a library with a decorative theme in a Hotel...In this case, I hope the Judge sees fit to follow that line of reasoning. 

OTOH-Maybe the Hotel should patent using the DDC as a business method of putting numbers in a Hotel.

"Dean Sanchez" <DSANCHEZ@fcci-group.com> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu 10/02/2003 06:23 AM Please respond to dvd-discuss

To:        "Dvd Discussion Group (E-mail)" <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>        cc:                Subject:        [dvd-discuss] 120 years and still not in the public domain

Could someone explain how a system of cataloging books invented over 120 years is not in the public domain?  I am referring to the Dewey Decimal Classification system.  This has been nagging at me ever since I first read the article.  The complaint argues that it is trademark infringement to use the system.  This appears to be an end run around the time limitations for copyrights and patents.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ny--deweydecimaldefen0920sep20,0,3455241.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire