Rep. @JustinAmash doesn't understand #trademark law. And he's a lawyer. Media reporting this story is also clueless. http://kdvr.com/2015/12/14/congressman-troubled-by-taylor-swifts-attempt-to-copyright-1989/ …
-
-
@justinamash I don't agree with you. A year/number can also be a trademark. It isn't generic. You don't seem to know that or understand why. -
@ProofofUse Years/numbers consist of characters. I'm beginning to think that you don't understand trademark law or you just like arguing. -
Actually,
@justinamash, I can vouch for@ProofofUse. He understands#trademarks quite well. So far he's winning this argument. Quite well. -
@RonColeman@ProofofUse She can trademark "1989" logo and "1989" for specific uses/contexts. What's the disagreement? -
@justinamash@RonColeman that's not what you initially wrote:https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/676532065291141120 … -
@ProofofUse@RonColeman That's consistent. Number itself is too generic, just as "Apple" is too generic outside specific uses/contexts. -
@justinamash@RonColeman Yes, APPLE is generic for "apples." What is 1989 generic for? Please be specific as to the uses/contexts. -
@ProofofUse@RonColeman It's a generic descriptor for the year and events that took place in that year. - 12 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.