Kent Crispin wrote:
> What on earth makes you think that "free expression" is the opposite
> of TM? It is perfectly consistent for a TM holder to favor "free
> expression". I wager you $100 that 3 out of 4 TM owners favor free
> expression.
It is a well-established part of the practice of real law that there is a
persistent tension between the right of expression recognized in the first
amendment and the right of trademark (and copyright holders) to control the use of
their marks or products. I'll wager you that 4 out of 4 TM lawyers will tell you
the same thing.
> That's what makes Karl's statement metaphysics -- there is no
> meaningful opposite to a TM constituency. There is no meaningful
> opposite to a registry constituency. There is no meaningful opposite
> to a constituency composed of one person, for example me. If you
> think about this 30 seconds you will probably understand my point.
Well, if we're talking Hegelian opposites, yeah, that's metaphysical. Although at
time I believe that I am the thesis and you and Dave Crocker are the anti-thesis.
(I just can't wait to see the synthesis.)
--MM
