Comments on: Lawyers: Stop us before we kill again.

By: Brian Heller

Brian Heller — Thu, 19 Dec 2002 04:42:14 +0000

"To be or not to be" isn't the question anymore. By whatever means, this site is back by popular demand.

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 03 Dec 2002 07:41:15 +0000

The trademark dilution issue may be real, "forcing" the opera houses' hands just as Disney is forced to go after day care facilities that use their characters on the walls without permission (or maybe they are just evil?). But it would seem some sort of extended protections of the sort already granted to news agencies would make sense. Why should a non-commercial use of that trademark really constitute dilution? Granted, it becomes more common language if that mark is used, say, for any opera, but using the name of the opera house in reference to that opera house is hardly dilution; if anything, it is the opposite.

Refering to that specific opera house only with that name would appear to strengthen the specificity of that trademark (or whatever the legal term would be).

So I'm not even sure how this constitutes trademark dilution if it is allowed to continue, regardless of whether, practically, it is stupid for the lawyers to go after fans.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:24:23 +0000

Personally I like the first suggestion. It reminds me of Gary Larson's story regarding the Jane Goodall cartoon. (Two chimps in a tree: one says to the other while picking something off his back, "Another blonde hair, you've been hanging around that Jane Goodall tramp again!" or something like that. The Jane Goodall Institute either threatened to sue, or did sue. Eventually, either the lady herself or someone else with a brain, heard about the whole debacle and immediately stopped the suit. The end result? They paid Larson for the rights to print his cartoon on THEIR t-shirts and posters! A wonderful about-face!!

By: Leonardo

Leonardo — Sat, 16 Nov 2002 04:36:53 +0000

Quite simple: don't use the name of the place. Refer to "an Opera house in Manhattan" or something. But the list of presentations is history, everyone should be able to register it.

By: Brian Yoder

Brian Yoder — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:10:02 +0000

This is a pervasive problem. All kinds of institutions, groups, and businesses (or more specifically their lawyers) are progressively making it illegal to publish information ABOUT them via various trademark and copyright laws. Who exactly thinks this is a smart idea (besides the lawyers who are paid to enact such nonsense I mean)? My art site occasionally gets similar threatening letters because it mentions artists, galleries, and museums. Very strange and very sad.

--Brian

By: cel4145

cel4145 — Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:42:18 +0000

At least actions such as may help educate the public that enforcement of copyright--as copyright is currently legislated--is in many cases more immoral than the act of infringement.

By: button

button — Thu, 14 Nov 2002 16:03:46 +0000

"Only an automaton!"

Dean is right.

Larry Lawyer, do you think they could negotiate a stay of execution if they change the name of the site to avoid copyright infringement?

Maybe Opera could commit suicide more effectively with poison, a dagger, garotte, cannon ball or elephant from Aida sitting on them. Ya think? Nah!

By: John Robb

John Robb — Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:33:39 +0000

There is a way around this: a desktop website that runs on a local CMS (his site is data driven and not just a collection of static pages). The "package" of functionality could be distributed via P2P. If there is damage, route around it.

By: Michael Jennings

Michael Jennings — Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:17:32 +0000

Surely to protect the trademarks, all you have to do is ask the owner of the side to use capital letters where appopriate and perhaps put up a notice saying that " is a registered trademark which is the property of . This site has is independent of them." If this is not the case, why is it not the case?

By: Dennis Moser

Dennis Moser — Thu, 14 Nov 2002 06:00:30 +0000

I didn't believe this until I went to the "archived" version of the site. That 70 years of history has been put together by an individual out their love of an institution is a profound thing worthy of support, not the cutting off of air supply.

Apparently, there is no such things as "common sense" when it comes to the use of a so-called trademark law. While the name "Metropolitan Opera" might be a trademark, there is nothing legally to prevent me from saying the words as many times as I wish on a webpage.It saddens me no end to see that MetManiac has felt obliged to comply with the outrageous demands of the New York Opera Company. I wish that they had the wherewithal to fight this.

I truly fear that this is simply another episode of many more to come. And thus, our history disappears...