Welcome to the Great Censorship Wars
Dear Cyber Artists,
Welcome to the Great Censorship Wars or what I like to call the Cyber Art Wars!
The Cyber Art Wars involve companies like CafePress.com and Zazzel.com which do not permit certain type of art or designs to be reprinted using their services. Generally this relates to protecting a trademark or preventing a violation and/or infringement upon an existing trademark.
Although I am not an employee of CafePress.com, Zazzel.com or any other dot.com that operates a design reproduction service, companies which I use and value as publishers, my experience with such services has given me some insight into how they operate. However, I do not know why CafePress.com would not permit the publication or reprint of any particular design. My response in the past when they would remove or set one of my designs as "PENDING" would be to simply remove the design in question and make variations which did not have a problem. The reason for this is that in the past when a dispute has arisen in which I do not believe any infringement of intellectual rights was made, it has always taken too much time to argue the dispute, and as time is money, it has always been more profitable just to remove the design and replace it with a dozen new designs which were not in conflict with existing policy.
As I do not work for CafePress.com, Zazzel.com or any similar dot.com printing service, I repeat, I cannot speak for them. If you have a dispute with those or similar services you should contact their representatives to help resolve the dispute. All I can do is refer to their policies. You have to read about what kind of designs they do not permit. For example, they do not permit people to use trademarks, slogans or logos owned by other companies. That makes sense as they do not want to be sued.
Based upon my own experience with CafePress.com they remove designs if there is even a hint of an infringement issue or if anyone, especially a client or their lawyers complain. For example, when I made an I (Heart) NY design that said "I (Heart) NY Except for the traffic, noise and rats!" a complaint was registered by the law firm that represents the Tourist Commission for New York State. This was not long after 9/11 and everyone was sympathetic toward New York. I had seen a documentary about New York City that said there were at least seven to eleven rats for every person, meaning that there were at least 56 to 88 million rats in New York City alone, not to even mention how many might be in other New York cities. This documentary report inspired me to make the I (Heart) NY Rats design. Then someone saw my design and notified the lawyers who represent the State of New York.
This law firm actually contacted CafePress.com to find out who posted the New York Rat designs. CafePress.com gave them my contact information and then the law firm wrote me a letter to cease and desist from using the designs. I looked up the trademarks on the I (Heart) NY design on the Internet at the US Government Trademark/Patent office site. Anyone can actually go to that site, search for trademarks, and see the picture and read the description of the registrations. After learning what the registered trademark said, I made a web site related to this as I regarded it as a censorship issue. In my mind, the lawyers and/or their clients, simply did not want me hurting the tourist industry by mentioning all the rats in New York City, even though this was a documented fact.
So what I did was remove the designs in question, as I can't win in a fight against the State of New York. And I made more ornate designs related to New York which are so different from the simple I (Heart) NY design that the lawyers cannot possibly say there is an infringement or win a claim in regard to this issue and my original, unique designs.
Basically as I understand it CafePress.com has adopted a policy or rules to avoid claims against them. This is a typical way big companies operate. They want to be released of all responsibility and liability. They really do not care who the designs belong to as long as no one sues them. So they simply remove any designs in question, especially if there is a trademark infringement claim or issue that has been brought to their attention.
Recently I posted a dozen or so new designs on CafePress.com related to the 2006 Winter Olympics. They were all immediately flagged after being posted. They were flagged so fast that I believe a keyword robot program is being used for this purpose, even though I do not have any confirmation in this regard from CafePress.com. However, I did get an email from CafePress.com which looked like an automatic response email. I do not think a real live person even looked at my 2006 Winter Olympics designs. But in the description and keyword tags I used the term "Winter Olympics" which may have been scanned by a robot program as a design to set as "Pending." I ended up removing all the designs and making new ones that did not have any association whatsoever with the Winter Olympics. These are Italian Flag Snowflake designs. They are still posted.
I think in this and similar cases CafePress.com does not want to risk any association or conflict with the US Olympic Committee. However, my designs were not in conflict. I have actually gone to the Olympics PR site and read what they do not allow. My designs did NOT use the Olympic interlocking rings or any logos or mascots associated with or owned by the Olympics organization. So there was no infringement. However, I have concluded that CafePress.com does not want to permit any designs that are associated with the Olympics whatsoever. When I went to the CafePress.com site and searched for "Olympics" it came up with no hits. So apparently CafePress.com is flagging all design related to certain keywords that could possibly result in an infringement even before real people look at the designs. I did email CafePress.com about this issue and asked if they are flagging designs before a real person even looks at them but a real person did not even read or answer my email. I got another automated response. When such an issue comes up and you cannot immediately talk with a real person, it makes it easier to just remove the design in dispute and replace it with a dozen designs that are not in dispute.
Even though my designs related to the 2006 Winter Olympics were not an infringement, they were flagged. In this particular situation which occurred several weeks before the 2006 Winter Olympics, there was not time to resolve this issue before the games began. So I simply skirted the issue and posted designs related only to cities/towns and winter sports with no mention of the Olympics whatsoever. Those designs have not been flagged and are still posted in the Byteland Art Gallery under the header "International Themes" as Italian Flag Snowflake designs.
Of course they will not be as popular as a design that relates to this major sporting event. But at least they may be maintained on-line indefinitely and may result in some income or profit.
In this regard it is my position that the Olympics is basically an exploitation of young athletes. It has grown into a mega sport and big business at the expense of creative artist. So the games, at least in this regard, are resulting in the censorship of creative artist who want to support the events by making art. Even though the Olympics Committee and/or organization only have ownership on a few specific logos and phrases, which they rightfully license to support the organization, this often results in censorship. Because lawyers have entered the arena and actively go after anyone who does make a genuine infringement, the result is that services like CafePress.com will not even permit designs that are not an infringement as they do not want to have the slightest bit of risk of getting sued. So the mere treat or mention of a claim causes censorship.
This also happens with the big colleges and universities. I had to remove at least two dozen designs in a series I made related to colleges and universities, even though these designs use my original heart graphics. Some law firm representing universities in the SEC contacted CafePress.com saying that because some of my heart designs used colors associated with various universities who were their clients, and used abbreviations associated with the universities, that there was an infringement. You see, these law firms have now gone out and gotten the universities as clients so the law firms can make big profits. Then they aggressively search for claims, sort of like chasing an ambulance. But in this case they are chasing the artist. The result is that with the first mention of a possible infringement CafePress.com runs scared and flags designs.
Although I only know of my own case, and a few others, I figure thousands upon thousands of people using CafePress.com have had designs flagged. CafePress.com does employ a person or persons to review designs. In the past I have had some correspondence with these people who have changed over time. But I have concluded that it takes too much time and effort to argue a claim. In the same amount of time I can make a dozen or more new designs that are not in conflict. So that is a more profitable strategy. When a design is removed, simply replace it with a dozen new designs. That way I profit form the censorship and those responsible for the censorship will ultimately not profit, as they will certainly not be getting paid for filing a false claim against my work/designs and their clients will make less as my designs will still be out their competing in the market offering people a choice of which design to buy.
You have to realize that if a claim involves lawyers, that the lawyers get paid regardless of the merits of the claim. Even if the lawyers lose a claim, they still get paid. In fact, law firms get paid just by making a claim of infringement for their clients; these greedy lawyers get paid just by searching the Internet, finding designs that raise their eyebrows, and sending off an email to the people at CafePress.com or Zazzel.com saying they better remove the offensive design or else! That "Or else" is the threat of a big law suit. These ambulance/artist chasing lawyers sign up a university to let them manage their trademark issues, and for every hour they can show that they worked on this matter, they get paid, perhaps as much as $120.00/hour or more! It is a way lawyers have to get rich while artist starve!
So the lawyers and law firms are making big bucks going after artists even when there is no real threat, hurt or harm caused by the starving artists. Certainly I am not making enough money off of any design to hurt the State of New York or a big university. But the lawyers are making mega bucks just searching CafePress.com and Zazzel.com finding any possible design that could be bases for a claim or a threat of a claim. Even though the lawyers know that no cases will ever reach court, as CafePress.com and Zazzel.com will flag and remove any designs, still the lawyers can report that they spent time on the case, represented their client, and bill their clients their high per hour rate fees. So you see, this is a way lawyers are making big bucks at the expense of starving artist who are making hardly anything, as the commissions artist make from CafePress.com or Zazzel.com are not so high as to warrant or merit a law suit.
But this is easy money for lawyers to make. My concern is that it hurts starving artist. It certainly has resulted in the censorship of my own work. My case is only one case. But as CafePress.com has over 2.5 million members, probably many people have had their work censored in this manner. The work is being censored by lawyers who search for designs. The lawyers also search for clients. The lawyers go out, get a client then search for designs using the Internet. Then the lawyers keep track of their time spent doing this and bill their clients huge hourly rates. They keep records of all designs. They threaten artist and CafePress.com or Zazzel.com with law suits. Such law suits never occur as it is policy of CafePress.com and Zazzel.com to remove designs at any hint or threat of infringement. But you see, still the lawyers make $120.00/hour or more representing their big clients!
This is a form of censorship, pure and simple, at least that is how I see it based upon my own experience and the particular designs I have had flagged/censored from CafePress.com in the past. Lets face it, when I make a design series from scratch, say an I (Heart) Design for every state, city or university and these parties do NOT have a heart design to begin with, how have I infringed upon their trademark? If I had millions of dollars I could hire lawyer to register trademarks on all my designs and fight these big law firms and institutions. But I do not have such resources. So my solution is to remove any designs flagged and make variations that can not be disputed by the ambulance/artist chasing lawyers.
Now certainly there are genuine cases where intellectual property rights are owned and infringed upon to a high degree. That is what trademarks are for, the registration of a particular design or logo to be used on a manufactured product as a symbol of the creator or owner, such that no one else will come along and make a counterfeit and market it for profit. But trademarks are limited to a specific design or logo and a drawing of the design or logo along with a written description must be filed with the trademark in the US Patent Office. Then when dealing with international trademarks the issue gets very complicated as it involves other countries. Then enter China, North Korea and other rouge states which do not even respect national or international trademarks. When these countries set up a factory and mass produce exact copies of item by the millions, that is when you have a real case of infringement. Those are the types of cases these big law firms should be going after, not the little guy, not the starving artist making heart designs like me! I am the victim here and the lawyers chasing after me and other starving artist are the criminal as they are making false claims and accusations so that they can service their clients like prostitutes and get paid big bucks.
As for how and why any particular design may be considered a possible infringement, I cannot say without seeing the design. Plus you would have to consult with CafePress.com or Zazzel.com or review their policies. Certainly any original design which is not associated with an existing trademark should be permitted. However, if a design or image owned by someone else was used to make a design it may be a violation of copyrights or trademarks. For example, celebrities generally do not permit usage of their image without prior written consent. Or a clip art or template, even if posted on the Internet, may not be meant to be used for profit without prior written consent or license.
With regard to my own designs and graphics, I always start with a blank canvas. I start from scratch, from a empty or white/blank screen, analogous with a blank piece of paper. All my designs are based upon original drawings, photographs or designs I create upon the computer using graphic arts software. I don't use the templates that CafePress.com offers and I don't use clip art. I know the size that a design needs to be to make a quality print, and so I start with a blank image size that is the size it needs to be or in some cases twice the size that it needs to be. That insures good printing. Sometimes I use photographs or scans. Sometimes I start with a drawing that I have made on paper, which is scanned. Sometimes I just use graphic software. In this manner I avoid any possible infringement ... at least that is what I thought. However, because their are ambulance chasing lawyers, or in this case artist chasing lawyers looking up my ass, it is possible to get claims of infringement even when working from a blank canvas.
This is especially true when making a series of designs. For example, when I made a series of I (Heart) designs on CafePress.com, for every state, obviously a design saying I (Heart) NY could not be included in the series. So I made one that varied the slogan. But that was not enough to satisfy the censorship lawyers, especially as I mentioned rats! So now my I (Heart) NY designs are much more ornate and the lawyers have my sword up their ass (remember, the pen is mightier than the sword) and can do nothing about it!
Original heart designs produced by cutting out a heart template to make a unique heart shape and using Photo Suite to add an original slogan, type font and unique layout of the heart in an attractive and appealing arrangement.
|
These designs were de-published and are NOT being used on CafePress.com. It is not worth my time and effort to contest this issue. Rather I directed CafePress.com to voluntarily remove these designs and told them I would just make new designs that will not be in dispute. However I think this is still a matter of censorship. Other heart |
If you want to see my review of this issue visit Position Paper: Copyright and the Creative Process. Also note that I own www.cafepress.com/ilovenewyork which now has a copyright symbol posted at that site. After I waged war with the censorship lawyers over the I (Heart) NY issue I posted instructions for how to make I (Heart) Designs. I am sure this was a major factor which resulted in numerous heart designs shops being created on CafePress.com.
I believe I was one of the first people, if not the first person, on CafePress.com to every make I (Heart) Designs for every state/city and it proved such a good idea, others are now doing it. But you cannot trademark or copyright an idea. So basically what I did is arm the populace with weapons, in this case instructions on how to make heart designs, so now CafePress.com is flooded with heart designs. I still think my heart designs are some of the best on the market. And I take some degree of pride in knowing that my strategy in this regard outwitted the censorship lawyers. So now I am on their "shit list" and that may explain why some of my designs receive their attention. Or maybe I am just paranoid. Or maybe I am just so prolific in my creativity that it is highly probably that original designs I create will result in a possibility of infringement, even though I started with a blank canvas!
When you create a design and by chance it resembles an existing trademark or logo, to me this is not the same as when a big company pirates a product and/or logo and mass produces counterfeit merchandise. In one case you have an accidental association; in the later you have an intentional effort to create a counterfeit product. It should be the intentional efforts to counterfeit and market trade-marked items that the lawyers go after, not harmless, accidental associations. But of course to the lawyers, every possibility of infringement makes they big bucks, so they go after whatever pops up on their searches of the Internet. Obviously with over 4,000 design items posted (as of early 2006), there is a probability some of my designs will attract the attention of ambulance/artist chasing lawyers. So ever since the I (Heart) NY Rats incident, I have regarded it as a badge of honor that my work is so good that the State of New York has sought to censor my designs! What greater recognitions could an artist possibly receive!
Thus in dealing with the censorship lawyers, who I regard as a form of low life on the order not even approaching that of slugs and snails, I'd recommend that everyone else do the same. If your designs are censored by CafePress.com or Zazzel.com, realize the problem is with ambulance/artist chasing lawyers who have figured out a way to get $120.00/hour or more from their clients who are big corporations, universities, states and/or celebrities. They then apply their effort to threatening to sue CafePress.com, Zazzel.com, ISPs or other dot.coms and/or artist using these services. So if you get a design to draw the attention of the ambulance/artist chasing lawyers, it is a badge of honor. You should wear it with pride and exclaim to the world, via the Internet, how these greedy, sleazy, slimy lawyers censored your design! It means you have made a good design that someone else regards as a threat, that they do not want it in the market place for fear they may not make as much money. If it is a really great design the King of England or the President of the United States make sick their lawyers on you!
Personally I think these ambulance chasing, slimy lawyers and the policies imposed by CafePress.com, Zazzel.com and other dot.com services are just forms of censorship. They do not really protect against the real makers of counterfeit items, who operate in countries like China which do not respect international trademarks. I recently saw a news report where it showed how in China major brands of all sorts of items, from watches to automobiles, are counterfeited! Now that is real infringement. But the lawyers cannot do much about it because China does not respect international trademarks.
Of course if I make an original design and someone in China starts producing counterfeit T-shirts or mugs, I have no recourse. In fact, I'm sure this is being done. Probably there are operations in China which just take designs right off CafePress.com, Zazzel.com and other dot.com services and reprint them upon everything imaginable. They probably even export some of them. The solution to this problem, is to get China to change its laws and respect international trademarks. But this is not likely to happen until there is a democracy in China. And that means revolution! Yes, I do support a revolution in China and strongly advocate the demise of the red communist Chinese government which is corrupt, exploitative and criminal in nature!
So you see designs and censorship are a BIG issue! I'm sure there are designs I have created that are probably censored in China or in countries like North Korea. I doubt my anti-terrorist designs are very popular with the insurgents in Iraq. And I doubt the NSA appreciates my BBB (Big Brother Bush) designs related to wire tapping and spying on private American citizens. But ever since I made the first one of these and posted it on CafePress.com, everyone else is now making Big Brother Bush designs. Can I claim rights to BBB (Big Brother Bush)? Is CafePress.com going to remove everyone else's BBB designs. No, because I can't afford a big law firm to chase after all these other artist infringing upon my designs. Plus I would not do this because I believe in free enterprise and the idea that this stimulated creativity. May the best man win, may the best design win, that is my philosophy. But the way trademark works is that you can trademark any basic design, any simple logo or phrase, and then use it to claim ownership. In the hands of greedy lawyers this results in censorship of other designs, even if they are better.
The Great Censorship Wars will continue. There have been court battles fought in this regard. I do not believe any of my designs that have been censored from CafePress.com actually were an infringement on anyone's intellectual property rights. But I do believe there are greedy lawyers chasing ambulances and one of them is marked with my name and initials! That is why now I make more ornate hearts and complex designs using mosaics, patterns, boarders, backgrounds, or other stylish designs, and why one day I'd like to have the means to mass produce and market my own design items without having to use a service like CafePress.com.
Where is all this leading? Perhaps in the future I will have my own factory and be able to bypass CafePress.com. I'd love to have a company in China produce and market my designs on merchandise. I'd love to be like Nike and put my check mark/logo on everything from shoes to T-shirts and then hire greedy lawyers to go after people for stealing my designs. Hee, hee, I'd then be like the State of New York chasing after my own tail, biting my own ass! Boy, would not that be ironic!
All this makes for interesting discussion and consideration. It is an issue which definitely concerns me and all other creative souls. Maybe this is worth of greater consideration and would be a good issue to develop into a larger web site or forum. Certainly censorship is an issue which effects everyone using CafePress.com, Zazzel.com and other dot.coms. Although they have moderated forums, this is one which demands an open forum. Designs related to censorship are another issue. Do you thing CafePress.com or Zazzel.com would post any designs related to Anti-Olympics or Anti-SuperBowl or Anti-IBM or Anti-MSN or Anti-NBC? Probably not as ambulance chasing lawyers would immediately claim these infringe upon registered trademarks. So you see, registration of a trademark can be used to censor protests because you cannot market items which use another's trademark.
I can see both sides of the issue. But as a creative artist I tend to take the side of the starving artist. There should not be censorship. And certainly trademarks, a way to brand a product's owner and manufacturer, is a good idea, as is copyright. But this largely benefits the BIG companies as they are the only ones who can afford to pay lawyers to make trademark or copyright infringement claims.
When the issue came up regarding my university related heart designs, I responded by creating a U of X design or UX design. This is my original copyrighted design. If you review my city/state heart designs in the Byteland Art Gallery you with see the U of X Heart design where U of F, FSU and other university heart designs should be. This is because a law firm chased my ambulance causing me to have to remove about two dozen university related heart designs, even though none of the universities in question had a trademark on a single heart design. Do you think I was infringing upon the intellectual property rights of any university? Do you think my few designs hurt any big university? Not hardly! These big universities have their own trademarks, seals and logos and they license them to put upon hundreds of thousands of products sold on campus and throughout their states. They make millions of dollars doing this. In college and university town many private enterprises carry university related design items and no infringement is involved. But lawyers now are going after artist because the Internet enables easy searches and this is a way they can justify their big hourly fees! It is a censorship scam! And the lawyers are making a killing at the expense of struggling artists!
Certainly this effects everyone who uses CafePress.com, Zazzel.com and other dot.com services. The solution for me is simply to delete any designs that CafePress.com, Zazzel.com or other similar services may flag. It take too much time to dispute a design. That same time can be used to make designs that are not in dispute. So that is my policy in regard to how to deal with designs removed by CafePress.com or other dot.com services regardless of the reason a design is removed. In other words, don't argue with CafePress.com or other dot.coms, they are just trying to avoid conflict and liability. They are just trying to avoid a claim against them, trying to make money and trying to provide a service without creating conflicts or getting their ass bit by greedy lawyers representing even more greedy clients. With 2.5 million plus users I can understand why CafePress.com needs a policy which avoids liability and conflict.
So to have a most profitable emporium on CafePress.com you need to learn the rules of the game. You need to only post those designs that are permitted by their rules. You need to realize that even if you are right and a design you make is original, is your own unique creation, that it still will not always be permitted on CafePress.com. You can post it on the Internet or print it out and market copies yourself, or hire a printer to print it on items and then sale them on eBay, but some items CafePress.com will not market as they result in conflict.
Of course I'm use to conflict. Good art often creates conflict. Some of the best art results in extreme protest and extreme conflict. A clever artist learns how to use this to his/her advantage and so profit. That is why censorship issues make for good web sites. You see, I can take this discussion, post it as a site on the Internet, then link to my CafePress.com emporium and gallery, and then profit from everyone who is outraged by censorship, who reads this and then goes to my site and buys an anti-censorship item.
So you see, there are ways to turn censorship to one's advantage. That is one of the keys in dealing with problems. Find solutions which turn the situation around and work to your advantage. This is one of the principles of war, a basic concept of the Art of War. When the enemy is greater in force and power, do not attack the enemy straight on; use diversion to divide and conquer the enemy. In this case the diversion is to comply, seemingly, to remove any design that is in conflict. Then create a diversion, in this case a web site that displays the design, but does not market that specific product. Then divide and conquer by sending people back to various web sites that have permitted products. Thus all conflict is avoided and you still make a profit from the disallowed or censored item.
This is what I did when the lawyers attacked me for my I (Heart) NY RATS design. I even created a small I (Heart) icon font that can be used on the Internet that belongs to me and has my initials hidden inside the design. So now I own this particular I (Heart) font! Clever, huh!
That is the strategy I recommend when dealing with design censorship by ambulance/artist chasing lawyers. It is really not CafePress.com or Zazzel.com that is responsible for the censorship (though they are complacent). They are just trying to provide a service and avoid conflict and law suits. It is the greedy lawyers and their greedy clients, big corporations, large institutions, who pay these greedy lawyers to chase ambulances with the names of artist on their sides. They are the ones doing the censorship.
If you agree and are against censorship of your art, designs or photographs, and encounter a problem with your art or designs being censored, take heart. Use it as an opportunity to make a dozen or more new designs, designs that have no association with any existing trademark, copyright, celebrity or other party.
Then you will be the one to come out ahead and on top and the ambulance chasing lawyers will be left with no asses to kiss except their own!
Terry Lynch
Byteland Art Gallery
In recent years another issue has entered the arena with respect to creating original designs. Now trade mark law permits any company with enough power, influence and money to get an English word or phrase trade marked. Thus the creative artist cannot market designs which use that word or phrase. A classic example of this is Apple Inc. trying to get a trademark on "POD" claiming that their creation "iPod" somehow gives them the ownership of the word "pod" which has been in the English language for hundreds of years.
This is the same legal idiot logic that is being used by many big and powerful firm to get trade marks on other words and phrases, then to mass produce items in third world nations which pay slave labor wages, products which are then marketed in the United States, Europe and other relatively rich nations to enable enormous profits. This practice ultimately hurts consumers and empowers corrupt governments and equally corrupt corporations to hurt and harm people who are not able to stand up and speak for themselves, people in nations like Red China who will be thrown into prison if they try to stop the corruption.
So the very process of granting a trade mark on an English word or phrase is hurting Americans! This hurts every creative artist and designer. This is why the US Olympic committee can censor designs which incorporate words or phrases that this agency has gotten a trade mark upon. Said committee is now getting trademarks on every city and date associated with announced games. This practice also serves to aid in any protest or boycott of games by prohibiting accurate presentation of designs or advertising because to make a protest one must use words, phrases and/or terms upon which the US Olympics committee has obtained a trade mark. This same form of censorship can be used by any company or corporation which obtains a trade mark upon any word or phrase in association with its products. Thus how can you boycott Disney or McDonalds when you cannot show or use their names?
The idiotic law of permitting trade mark on English words and/or phrases has thus given power to big companies and foreign governments such that now they can censor the free speech of Americans. Money, greed and the power and control it enables has thus corrupted this basic freedom every American has been given via the US Constitution. Where will this lead if not stopped?
Clearly this process is already hurting creative Americans. Permitting word/phrase trademarks enables all sorts of products not Made In USA to be marketed in the United States, Europe and other nations and be accepted in the market place, when, in fact, they are made in China or other third world nations where slave labor wages are paid. This also enables goods which use animal byproducts such as dog fur to be easily marketed in the United States. Ultimately this empowers corrupt governments to establish growth industries that result in cruelty to both humans and animals. A primary example of this is Red China which has participated in the killing of tens of thousands of dogs; then marketing canine byproducts and furs under English product brand names!
The trade mark laws in the United States and other nations need to be reformed to NOT allow word/phrase trade marks. Only designs and/or logos should be permitted to be trade marked, which was the original intent and purpose of a trade mark, such that an original, unique mark could be associated with its owner and creator. When trade marks are permitted for words/phrases it immediately creates ambiguity; no one knows who owns the word/phrase; big corporations try to buy up English word and phrases such as "pod" so they can profit exclusively; and general corruption is enables as consumers and made blind that they cannot properly associate any goods or services with the manufactures and make informed purchase or reject certain items. Freedom of choice is thus compromise by deceit!
This process of word/phrase trade marks is a scam upon the consumer and should therefore be outlawed! It is a scam perpetuated by everyone involved including lawyers, corporation executives and corrupt government officials. It is a scandal which ultimately hurts all Americans for it is at the root of jobs being lost to third world nations, given the consumer can no longer easily determine where products are made and make an informed decision to only buy products Made in USA.
This process of word/phrase trade marks has an immediate harmful effect upon creative artists and designers. When you can not make a design that uses any word or phrase because some big company has bought that English language word or phrase via trade mark, this is censorship of the creative process and the process of freedom of speech. Plus it then results in loss of the consumers freedom of choice as consumers may be duped into buying products under an English language brand name when, in fact, those products are made in a country like Red China, which pays only slave labor wages and/or is responsible for great human rights violations and/or cruelty to animals.
America must realize that its very freedom is at stake and being sold off to corrupt interest at home and abroad. Unless this is recognized and stopped soon then in the future it will be practically impossible to recognize what products are made in America and which are made by Red China! In fact, America is at risk of becoming a third world nation, itself, plunged into poverty by corrupt corporation and governments which make inferior products at lower cost and market them using English language words and phrases ... that soon even Made in USA will be owned by Red China!
Click on pic to find your favorite shirt
2003bytal_cyan4.bmp){kind=small}