@netsrik:I agree with you.SDCC ignored all other perceived copy-cats
until one came along that was big enough (and close enough geographically) to
pose a threat.Having obtained trademarks in the past, I know firsthand the
effort it takes to show uniqueness from other brands.The trademark office
has clearly-defined rules as to what is accepted and what is not. Comic-con can
be a registered trademark. Comic con cannot.I won't debate the rules.
If anyone wants to condemn SLCC and argue in favor of SDCC, please save us all
the time and research the trademark rules BEFORE posting your opinion.There is no question about the outcome: The court will rule in favor of SLCC,
SLCC will become more popular, and SDCC will spend a lot of time cleaning egg of
their face and trying to salvage their reputation.
SDCC feels threatened by how big SLCC got so fast. I don't see how they
have a prayer in this. They're bullies.
So...Why didn't they sue until it said Utah? Why not the other
states before us? I believe that question should be addressed by the court. I
could state my reason and everyone might think I'm a bit out of the left
field. But the fact that I don't need to say it and everyone will already
know what I'm thinking, says enough by itself.If they
weren't willing to sue others for doing it, then they should have no
ability to sue anyone else. It's targeted and an unequal application of the
law. And that's assuming they'd even win.The very idea
that you can own an abbreviation is absurd!
Wow, financial makes are in extremes, ISSI is threating the stability of the
Middle East, Iran is about to become nuclear, The federal courts are distrorying
the structure of society, and rewriting our constitution, and we have people
suing over "Comic Con", really, Get a life people.
Totally loved going to comic con in SLC.Just see if you can find a
bigger place for the event or move some sections, book authors, to other
buildings in the area.