It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thieving company's

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2016 @ 08:07 AM
link   
I remember fourty or so years ago my mum bought me and my brother a pair of boots
She was a single mum so that was a big expense, nice boots, warm boots for our two cold winter months

Yeah they probably were not necessary but it was a nice gesture
UGG boots
Yep, not a brand name but a colloquial name, ugg boots
Designed just down the road, named because they were called ugly boots but were common in my neck of the woods for everyone who wanted warm feet, shortened to ugg boots

Now seemingly greedy US company's have in the style of greedy US company's trademark d the name ugg

A colloquial name of ugg from ugly
What a sad world we live in when greed overrides the little people, when courts steal from the common man for corporate greed

I knew a family who had a wine called Windows, Microsoft moaned and bitched about a wine called Windows so it had to be changed to something else, funny they changed the name to something better, My Crow, Microsoft losers, dills and arrogant tosses, stealing the English language like they own it

Why should a greedy company, how can a greedy company own a word, a common word
edit on 24-5-2016 by Raggedyman because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 24 2016 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman
Have you not read how Harrods in London jealously protects their own name? I believe they even went after a butcher in New Zealand whose surname really was Harrod.

Again there was the dispute between Peterborough United and Victoria Beckham about ownership of the nickname "posh".

It's not just the Americans.




edit on 24-5-2016 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Meh
It's just wrong isn't it
They steal words from our language for their own greed

Anything for money, anything
Point taken, changing the thread title
edit on 24-5-2016 by Raggedyman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman
I still have an industrial product by the name of "Microsoft", that is a surface preparation liquid. Kind of like a polish, but different at the same time. From my understanding, they had to change the name because Microsoft threatened a lawsuit. Don't know what they changed it to.

I found not too long ago, there is another business in the U.S. with the same name as mine. We don't seem to have a problem coexisting. Meh, intellectual property and all the jazz.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 08:38 AM
link   
They protect their name or logo so they can sell it as part of their retirement package. Sort of like famous rock song knock offs made into elevator music and TV ads.

I really love it when declining hollywood personalities begin selling insurance or reverse mortgages.

"Sold my soul to the company storrre…"



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Blame intellectual property lawyers.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

This is my favorite story from recent events going along your rant here:
‘Murica: The Inevitable Beer Response To Budweiser’s “America” Name Change


That didn’t take long: the day after Anheuser-Busch InBev said Budweiser would be temporarily renamed to “America”, a Michigan brewery came out with its own beery appeal to patriotism, albeit a tongue-in-cheek one: ‘Murica.

Saugatuck Brewing Company posted an image of its new brew bearing the words, “Actually American” on the packaging (AB InBev is based in Belgium, see?) on Facebook, writing, “Fear not, America. We’re here to make beer named after America great again.”

Alas, while Budweiser’s “America is in Your Hands” campaign is very real, very earnest, and getting very much mocked on social media right now, Saugatuck’s ‘Murica brew is a joke. How could it not be, when it “tastes like Freedom” and is “brewed under the careful watch of 1,776 Bald Eagles”?


Tastes like freedom!



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

I own a trademark. I will give permission, sometimes one will pay me to use it...and others? If what they are using it for doesn't conflict with mine...I will just let them continue using even if they do not approach me for permission.

Depends....MS



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: Raggedyman

I own a trademark. I will give permission, sometimes one will pay me to use it...and others? If what they are using it for doesn't conflict with mine...I will just let them continue using even if they do not approach me for permission.

Depends....MS

Yeah I get that, my issue is was so t a common name before you pur a trademark on it, that's stealing a common name to me

Is there a trademark on the word beer, how if I made that my intelectual property, it's wrong like saying the word Windows is my word and my iPad saying it has a capital I



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

greedy sons of bitches. My cousin tried to get back at some of the corporate jerks by starting Google + accounts under names like "Donald Trump" and "Bill Gates", etc. a few years ago when people thought Google + was going to be big. He thought maybe they would pay him for the accounts/names lol never happened. I gave him props for his creativity and ambition though



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: FamCore

Companies do that with websites. Like some companies will buy up domains like www.walmartsucks.com or something like that just so that you can't create a joke website about them. So that idea really wasn't that bad of an idea. Though using Google + may not have been the smartest idea. It would have been better try to identify the next up-and-coming soulless corporation and buy up similar domain names to it.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Nice, maybe this will be my new hobby outside of work
sounds like a lot of fun



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Yes. Common names...especially identical to another's...creates special consideration resolution that satisfies both parties.

It happens. Me too...there's someone out there with my name doing the same thing...we both just let it be....confusing as it is.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Raggedyman

This is my favorite story from recent events going along your rant here:
‘Murica: The Inevitable Beer Response To Budweiser’s “America” Name Change


That didn’t take long: the day after Anheuser-Busch InBev said Budweiser would be temporarily renamed to “America”, a Michigan brewery came out with its own beery appeal to patriotism, albeit a tongue-in-cheek one: ‘Murica.

Saugatuck Brewing Company posted an image of its new brew bearing the words, “Actually American” on the packaging (AB InBev is based in Belgium, see?) on Facebook, writing, “Fear not, America. We’re here to make beer named after America great again.”

Alas, while Budweiser’s “America is in Your Hands” campaign is very real, very earnest, and getting very much mocked on social media right now, Saugatuck’s ‘Murica brew is a joke. How could it not be, when it “tastes like Freedom” and is “brewed under the careful watch of 1,776 Bald Eagles”?


Tastes like freedom!


Freedom, cool, refreshing, good till the last drop.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Brotherman

You know it! This is my favorite line:
“brewed under the careful watch of 1,776 Bald Eagles”

Even the number makes it funny, lol.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Shane Stedman trademarked the term "Ugh Boots" in Australia in 1971, so, 45 years ago. Maybe the term migrated from Australia to wherever you grew up.

Before that, Frank Mortel made "Ugh Boots" in 1958 with no trademark after his wife said the boots were ugly.

So people have been selling and trademarking the term before it became a part of your childhood.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

There was a noodle shop in Okinawa that went by the name Popeyes for many years.

Popeyes chicken made them change their name.

People still call that noodle shop Popeyes. Never knew what their new name was...didn't care.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I sort of understand it, to be honest. A company's brand is essentially their entire identity in this world of soundbytes, hashtags, and social media BS.

It isn't just profit hungry corps, either. The Olympic Games committee has a long history of cease-and-desist orders and lawsuits against mom & pop stores in Olympia Washington and the surrounding area for having "Olympic" in their business names. It's the name of an entire region, a name which has been used since the 1780s... over 100 years before the Olympic Games committee even formed. Or the World Wildlife Foundation's lawsuit to force the WWF (wrestling) to change their name 15 years back.

That's the type of crap that's totally insane and shouldn't be tolerated, IMO.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

You aware that the greedy man who trademarked the name was a greedy surfer from greedy Australia?



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Well, 'iPad' was actually an invented word by Apple, so they do sort of sit on higher ground than M$ and WIndows do.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join