FindLaw reports that a California federal court has rejected a motion for injunctive relief brought by Axl Rose of Guns N’ Roses, to prevent the use of the name HOLLYWOOD ROSE: THE ROOTS OF GUNS N’ ROSES in connection with a CD featuring early recordings of the band Hollywood Rose, several of whose members went on to join Guns N’ Roses.
Friday afternoon trivia: work out anagrams for AXL ROSE.
Via IP News Blog, word of a website named CopyScape that compares text on one page with text of other pages in its (presumably vast) archive.
In other words, it could potentially spot a copyright infringement. It’s currently in beta. Give it a whirl.
Note Motley Fool’s cynical observation that Googles.com, home of the Googles, which has been co-existing with Google.com since 1997 but waited until Google was filing its IPO before moving to oppose one of Google’s trademark applications, did so in order to achieve publicity. The suggestion that someone would pay the $300 filing fee for an opposition for reasons other than to oppose a trademark is shocking.
The fact that Googles.com was able to work the fact that it is seeking investors into this article announcing the suit surely must merely represent comprehensive reporting.
Test
. . . will come back up. It was one of those computer things.
The Blog will be down for maintenance at some point this weekend. Have a good weekend.
Discussion of indemnfication issues arising from using LINUX in view of the SCO infringement claims, via Linux DevCenter.com
Ohio car dealership runs ad of Arnold Schwarzenegger in Ohio newspaper, without authorization. Schwarzenegger sues under right of publicity, in California. Ninth Circuit affirms dismissal, as Schwarzenegger shows neither general nor specific jurisdiction. Interesting discussion distinguishing case from Panavision v. Toeppen (where defendant’s tortious act ‘targeted’ California plaintiff).
Schwarzenegger v.Fred Martin Motor, 02-56937 (Ninth Circuit June 30, 2004)
