1. Fitted sheet must have label on bottom right seam
  2. Salted butter wrapping text must be red. Unsalted blue.
    • Hildegarde
      link
      fedilink
      212 months ago

      Sounds like you want trademark reform.

      There are basically no requirements for maintaining trademarks. If a company owns a name they can use that name and branding forever, no matter how false it becomes, no matter how much the business or product changes, they can keep the name. This shouldn’t be the case.

      If an ice cream company is named after their two founders, the company shouldn’t be able to keep using their names after they’re no longer involved. But under current laws they can.

      A glass company can build its reputation on making heatproof glass, then change the glass so its no longer heatproof, while still selling it under the same name. This is unjust.

      Companies should be forced to rebrand upon major changes. Current trade mark laws are fundamentally misleading.

      • @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        72 months ago

        The point of trademarks is to avoid market confusion.

        MTV didn’t instantly eliminate all of it’s programming and created new programming overnight. They had reality TV shows playing alongside music videos in the 90s. There are some people that might like a reality show that was on MTV when they were playing music videos, then suddenly the name of the company changes because they don’t play music and those people can’t find the show they like? Even though it’s still on, still being made by the same company, but under a different name because curmudgeons don’t think it’s appropriate that a company with the letter M in it’s name isn’t focused on music?

        Trademarks are about people being able to know which company they’re buying from. The name of the company is relatively arbitrary. You could start a company making computers and give it an arbitrary name like I don’t know “Apple”. then people will associate the quality of the computers with that arbitrary name “Apple”. Well you could if someone didn’t do exactly that already. It’s not so much the name it’s the consistency that matters most.

        And many names we just kind of forget their origins because they’re irrelevant to what the company now does. Does Motorolla have to change it’s name because they no longer make record players for cars? Does DC have to rebrand because very few of their comics are about detectives? KFC can’t call themselves that because a vast majority of their restaurants aren’t in Kentucky?

        I’d actually go the other way if anything. Make it illegal for a company to change it’s name. Facebook promotes eating disorders to teenagers? Sorry you aren’t changing your name to Meta, you can’t do bad shit and erase that negative brand association by re-branding. You want your brand to be considered good? Then do better.

    • Drusas
      link
      fedilink
      82 months ago

      “Local” sports teams should be comprised only of locals. No buying and trading from other regions.

    • @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      42 months ago

      I like this. It’s stupid that LA has the Lakers… because LA is known for it’s lakes? They also have the Dodgers… yeah because people are always dodging streetcars in LA?

      The MTV thing though… I think they’ve already made it so the M doesn’t stand for anything now. They removed the “Music Television” part off of their logo anyway.

    • JackFrostNCola
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 months ago

      Basketball:
      "Soon it was commonplace for entire teams to change cities in search of greater profits. The Minneapolis Lakers moved to Los Angeles where there are no lakes. The Oilers moved to Tennessee where there is no oil. The Jazz moved to Salt Lake City where they don’t allow music.

      The Raiders moved from Oakland to LA back to Oakland, no-one seemed to notice."