Before reading each seperate paragraph be sure to click the link first to read the article.
This article and example of infringement most certainly applies to anyone in the public eye that has their image used for an ad they have no affiliation with. Someone like President Obama could suffer adversely to something like this because of his status as a leader if say he tried to get re-elected for another term. If Weatherproof Garment kept the ad up in Times Square and had a controversy involving the company in the future this could as well tarnish Obama’s image. I think that the White House’s decision to ask the ad be removed is the right move. The fact that Weatherproof even had the gall to run this ad is pretty gutsy considering the person and image they used. It is a very clever move on the part of Weatherproof Garment but not something that will impact the president’s life if he decides to run for re-election.
This case as well peaked my interest because it involves Eminem who the company I work for deals with on a monthly basis. Eminem is someone who is no stranger to controversy but this time it isn’t him creating the controversy but rather someone using his music for financial gain. German carmaker Audi recently was sued for using an Eminem song in one of their advertisements. It is also said that Audi used the likeness of a Chrysler ad and will be served papers in the near future. Audi is not only facing copyright infringement but could also be dealing with infringement on intellectual property for a copy-written commercial that Chrysler owns.
Apple is a very important part of the computer world when related specifically
to the music industry with many producers, engineers and musicians using apple to create. Apple is now attempting to control a patent for the term podcast with plans to patent the term and idea. Macrumors.com has found cases of other companies trying to patent the term podcast but so far none have been successful. If Apple were able to create a patent for podcast and have the term added to their brand it could mean that many people who are looking to use what would probably be called the iPodcast would need to have a Mac. This idea would be another marketing strategy that Mac could use to get people to switch to its brand. Apple’s iPod has highly restrictive language when describing the product:
“Portable and handheld digital electronic devices for recording, organizing, transmitting, manipulating, and reviewing text, data, and audio files; computer software for use in organizing, transmitting, manipulating, and reviewing text, data, and audio files on portable and handheld digital electronic devices”
It will be a while before Apple is able to obtain a patent for something like podcast because it is already attached to so many other things. Apple is looking to keep their brand in tact by ordering a cease-and-desist to Podcast Ready for possible confusion with the iPod. I understand why Apple might be wanting this company to stopping using the term but I’m just not sure why it is taking this long considering iPod has been out 4 years now?
No comments:
Post a Comment