 |
With respect to khun "crazyfantasy", I totally agreed with you regarding to all the copyright infringements. Starbucks has all rights to protect its own brand so I understand that point. I'm so glad you bring this up,"the international trademark infringement laws", so I took some time to do a search. Only found just the US law, because Starbucks is US registered trade mark whereas "Starbung" has not been registered to any country's trademark just yet; therefore this might be in the US law concern dealing with "a Free-rider" as you mentioned in# 133.
According to "U. S. TRADEMARK LAW RULES OF PRACTICE & FEDERAL STATUTES
U. S. PATENT & TRADEMARK OFFICE August 9, 2012"
*******************************************************************************
TITLE VIII - FALSE DESIGNATIONS OF ORIGIN, FALSE DESCRIPTIONS. AND DILUTION FORBIDDEN
§ 43 (15 U.S.C. § 1125). False designations of origin; false description or representation
(a) (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which—
(A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or
(B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities,
shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.
(2) As used in this subsection, the term “any person” includes any State, instrumentality of a State or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Any State, and any such instrumentality, officer, or employee, shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.
(3) In a civil action for trade dress infringement under this chapter for trade dress not registered on the principal register, the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional.
*******************************************************************************
English to English: If this situation even go the court, it's all depending on the judge that "Starbung" is really intend to use Starbuck logo to confuse customers "OR" use the brand to promote his own brand or just a funny joke. All of those acts are likely to "damage" Starbucks (perhaps "profits" to decline and some sorts). All in all, it upon Judge's consideration.
English to Thai: ถ้าเรื่องนี้ไปถึงโรงถึงศาลจริงๆ (ซึ่งคงเป็นไปได้ยากถ้า Starbucks อยากจะเขียนเสือให้วัวกลัว หรือจะ ขี่ช้างจับตั๊กแตน ก็ตาม) ก็คงต้องขึ้นกับการพิจารณาของศาลน่ะค่ะว่า คุณบังเข้าตั้งใจที่จะใช้ตราสตาบัคเพื่อลวงลูกค้าหรือเปล่า หรือโปรโมท แบรนตัวเอง แล้วทำสตาบัคเสียหายมากน้อยแค่ไหน แต่ทั้งนั้นทั้งนี้คงต้องขึ้นกับวิจาณญาณของผู้พิพากษาหน่ะค่ะว่า เจตนาที่แจ้จริงของสตาบังคืออะไร
แก้ไขเมื่อ 21 ต.ค. 55 03:52:11
แก้ไขเมื่อ 21 ต.ค. 55 03:51:01
แก้ไขเมื่อ 21 ต.ค. 55 03:46:58
| จากคุณ |
:
ไข่มุก 
|
| เขียนเมื่อ |
:
21 ต.ค. 55 03:46:01
|
|
|
|
|
และแล้วสตาร์บั๊คส์ก็ลดตัวเองมาหาเรื่องกับพ่อค้ารถเข็น
