Astor Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 This entire story seems almost too ridiculous to be true, but i'm assured that it is real. It emerged on Tuesday that BSkyB has been ensconced in a legal battle with Skype for more than five years. ... A spokesman for Sky, which is 39.1pc-owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, said the company was trying to prevent Skype from using its trademark in relation to the sale of TV or internet service, because customer might assume that 'Skype' is part of Sky. "The key contention in the dispute is that the brands 'Sky' and 'Skype' will be considered confusingly similar by members of the public." I don't understand how the two can be confused, or why this has even gone on for so long. Besides, 'Skype Posse' has such a nice ring to it, it'd be a shame if Skype were forced to change their name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan7 Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 There is something deeply wrong with the legal system if Sky were to win this - they should be forced to pay all the costs of this ridiculous charade... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 Not to mention that our elitist- albeit secretive- group would have to find a new home! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liverandbacon Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 How does one go from Sky (of which NewsCorp is only a minority shareholder, albeit a large one) sues Skype, all the way to Rupert Murdoch sues Skype? Given the actual facts of the situation, I doubt Murdoch himself had anything to do with the lawsuit. The thread title is inaccurate, though this isn't really your fault, as the Telegraph's catchy, but ultimately vacuous, headline started the sensationalism. With that said, if Sky wins, there is something very wrong with Europe's legal system. The article says that Sky has sued a bunch of other companies for similar situations... Seriously, if you use a word so common as your brand, certain aspects of copyright law should cease to apply. That would solve a number of problems, like the whole "Edge games" lawsuit idiocy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 We're not changing our name to "pe posse" just cause someone wants to do some legal trolling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Yes, that's just peposseterous! /badum-tsh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Oh, Sabre... I told you Indians aren't funny... but Canadians are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Oh, Sabre... I told you Indians aren't funny... I have evidence to the contrary (This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.) BIRDIE NUM NUM mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 lol, I love that movie but Peter Sellers isn't Indian... he's just playing one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 rupert murdoch is a primal force that exists solely to generate money and is only incidentally evil. rupert murdoch can also eat a bag of d's. (pg-13) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 he can just pay someone else to do that for him... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 bags of d's are non-transferable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.