James M. Ray wrote:
> Failing that, I again suggest Evocashcasino, etc. instead of the
> constant infringement on e-gold's name
To the contrary, the best argument je can make in using E-Gold in
the name of the casino, is that E-Gold in the name is merely a descriptive
term, of a casino that accepts electronic gold -- and not just e-gold(R),
but goldmoney, e-bullion, etc. It is futher demonstrated that
E-Gold != e-gold(R) in that the capitalization is different, and that the
e-gold(R) logo lettering/stylization are not used.
An even stronger argument would be if E-Gold were not in the name of
the casino, but only in the domain. Then you can make the argument that
E-Gold is not only merely descriptive, but used in a way that can not
infringe in and of itself. eCash Technologies, Inc. v. Mark Guagliardo
set the precedent that registration and use of a domain name does not
in itself establish a trademark (nor a conflicting trademark). It can also be
strongly argued that DNS is a *directory* system and that domains do
not necessarily represent usage as a trade name. If DNS is a directory,
then the listing e-gold-casino is simply a directory entry of a casino
that accepts e-gold.
I am curious as to whether you think bet-with-egold.com would also
be infringing, used solely as a domain name (not the name of the destination
casino). Would the same phrase "Bet with e-gold" used on the casino
home page be infringing? What exactly is the difference?
You may not agree with these arguments, but until they are defended
in arbitration, the discussion is rather academic.
Adam
---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s)
via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common
viruses.
