Quote:
Originally Posted by pornlaw
Besides attacking me, please tell me why it is fundamentally flawed. You need to research reverse passing and false origin claims off under the Lanham Act. I believe that watermarking your content could protect content producers from tubes that publish their content with their TM logo on it. And if the tube site strips the watermark, it may only make their claim stronger.
The TM owner may also have a claim for false origin under the Lanham Act.
I am not saying its a guaranteed winner. What I said was it gives a content owner another weapon in the fight against piracy.
Seeing how your threads/posts seems to support piracy I didnt expect you to like the application of this decision to such actions though.
There is fair use when it comes to TMs but it is more limited than in copyright.
I also think it makes hosts here in the US and abroad more likely to police infringing sites.
|
says the guy who argued in another thread that the berne convention grants you the right to send DMCA takedown notices to foreign hosts.
the stretch you are trying to argue for would gut the concept of fair use.
so no parody could exist that used watermarked content.
so all that the downfall producers would have to do to again stop all the parodies that were put back was to stamp it with a watermark.