Eavis trys to trademark the word "Glastonbury"

[Larry O'Hara]

he's not, you dullard. But then facts were never your strong point, were they?



yeh! sock it to 'em, Larry. You're a fucking hero, mate.

Mr Ego...I can only (charitably) presume that illegal substances you may have inadvertently ingested while fiddling with bits of vinyl in darkened rooms have dulled your few remaining critical faculties--go back and read (or get an adult to) the original BBC story cited above. Or do you think that sucking up to corporate festivals will help you get your dream job as a Green Field lavatory attendant?

 

[kyser_soze]

Larry:

Here is the most recent trademark application:

http://webdb1.patent.gov.uk/RightSi...&DMW_INPUTFORM=ibis/ohim.htm&ohimnum=E4577573

The trademark is for the word 'Glastonbury' and is for a specific set of goods and/or services, apparantely for those goods and/or services connected with the Glastonbury Festival only. The trademark owner is trying to protect his own business, and why shouldn't he?

Besides, he's been filing trademark applications since 1999.

So yes, I did get the 'festival' bit wrong, but he's not trademarking everything to do with Glastonbury, just anything relating to the festival.

Still a world of difference from what you think it is.

Oh, and trademark is different from copyright.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Larry:



So yes, I did get the 'festival' bit wrong, but he's not trademarking everything to do with Glastonbury, just anything relating to the festival.

Still a world of difference from what you think it is.

Oh, and trademark is different from copyright.

what a non-bitter climb down, only slightly marred by the fact that it appears from that article that some local businesses don't hold to your benign interpretation. So, how different it is from what I think it is isn't yet totally established.

 

[laptop]

Copyright: An author/artist/photographer/composer's right to authorise (or not) reproduction of their work. Automatic: no registration required. Does not restrict use of the idea in the work, nor of short phrases from it.

Trademark: You may apply to register any non-obscene, non-misleading short phrase as a description of certain speficied business activities only. £200 gets you 10 years.

Patent: You may apply to register the idea behind a useful process.

Each is therefore entirely different from the others.

Some people clearly haven't absorbed the phrase in bold, nor the informed posts made on the basis of that understanding of what trademark is.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

disgusting that this Eavis character should try and get ownership to a name for a town that pre-exists him by hundreds of years.

And there is little 'freedom of expression' at Glastonbury either--censorship is ruthlessly used to prevent those outside the Dead Left 'consensus' ever getting a stall there. So fuck him & them.

Cock

 

[Dubversion]

as for opposing political representation, i must have hallucinated the various activist stalls in the Greenfields then

 

[laptop]

For those who are too exalted as "researchers" actually to read the source documents, what business activities the current application covers:

List of goods or services

Class 09:
Recordings of sound or images; records, compact discs, mini discs, laser discs, digital video discs, digital audio recordings, audio cassettes, video cassettes; magnetic tape, computer software and firmware, computer multimedia products; magnetic and optical programmes bearing media; floppy discs, CD-ROM, interactive compact discs; computer games, video games, interactive games; computer software, sound or video recordings, or publications, in electronic form supplied on-line or from facilities provided on the Internet; digital music provided from the Internet; digital recordings of performing arts entertainment provided from the Internet; sound recordings and images downloadable from the Internet; all relating to festivals of the performing arts.

Class 16:
Promotional literature; programmes; flyers; leaflets; tickets and passes; all relating to festivals of the performing arts.

Class 25:
Clothing; footwear; headgear; t-shirts, caps, baseball caps, sweatshirts, jackets; all relating to festivals of the performing arts.

Class 41:
Organisation, promotion, production, management and conducting of performing arts entertainments and festivals, including such services provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet; organisation of events for fund raising; performance arts and musical entertainment services; festival services, performance of music, dance, comedy, theatre, poetry and circus entertainment, including such services provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet; production of radio and television programmes; performance of radio and television programmes; production and performance of sound recordings, image recordings, videos, films, concerts, shows; recording studio services; music and text publishing services; musical and visual entertainment provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet; providing digital music from the Internet; electronic games services provided by means of the Internet or other on-line services; information, education, consultancy and advisory services relating to any of the aforesaid services, including such services provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet.

 

[kyser_soze]

Well I would imagine that to lefties like Larry O the very notions of copyright, trademark and patent are all symbols of capitalist control and oppression and NOT ways of affording artists, businesses and inventors legal protection to stop others ripping them off...

 

[Hollis]

Larry:



So yes, I did get the 'festival' bit wrong, but he's not trademarking everything to do with Glastonbury, just anything relating to the festival.

Still a world of difference from what you think it is.

Oh, and trademark is different from copyright.

Its a million miles from the true 60s D.I.Y festival vibe/ethics though, maan. Who cares if some mofo wants to steal your festival name.. Call it something else!

peace.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

laptops post

In other words, protecting the festival.....

 

[William of Walworth]

Larry -- the other aspect of that BBC story is that Michael Eavis is meeting the Chamber of Commerce and various local business types TODAY. I'm assuming that his purpose of that meeting is to clarify stuff, and allay local fears that this trademark move will affect them (as opposed to other Festivals specifically) in the way they fear.

In other words, watch this space etc. If I'm wrong in the above thoughts, it'll become clear soon enough.

 

[Hollis]

..

F.U.C.K the trademark maan!! Fuck branding. Fuck ownewship.. Peace, Happiness to all.

Rediscover the 60s Vibe dude!!

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Larry -- the other aspect of that BBC story is that Michael Eavis is meeting the Chamber of Commerce and various local business types TODAY. I'm assuming that his purpose of that meeting is to clarify stuff, and allay local fears that this trademark move will affect them (as opposed to other Festivals specifically) in the way they fear.

In other words, watch this space etc. If I'm wrong in the above thoughts, it'll become clear soon enough.

William--I agree with you. Nonetheless, while I have no problem with trademarking the Festival, the very idea that the town name can be trademarked by him is wrong. Surely?

 

[William of Walworth]

Its a million miles from the true 60s D.I.Y festival vibe/ethics though, maan. Who cares if some mofo wants to steal your festival name.. Call it something else!

peace.

No time to do this justice just now, but why should another festival be able to pass itself off as a near Glasto alternative? And why should the much longer established Glastonbury Festival have to change its name in consequence?

 

[William of Walworth]

William--I agree with you. Nonetheless, while I have no problem with trademarking the Festival, the very idea that the town name can be trademarked by him is wrong. Surely?

I'm far from convionced, despite the wording of the BBC story, that doing something so broadranging (to copyright the town name) IS his intention though, -- except specifically in a Festival context. But we'll know before long probably.

 

[kyser_soze]

...the very idea that the town name can be trademarked by him is wrong.

Don't you read? It's for SPECIFIC purposes and specific business items (e.g. festival merchandise) - not a general TM-ing of the town.

In other words, he can only use the TM when it relates to stuff to do with the festival, and can only claim infringement for those specific items, so someone calling their shop 'Glastonbury Crystal Healing' would not have to apply for permission to use the word 'Glastonbury'.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

the very idea that the town name can be trademarked by him is wrong. Surely?

Never let actual facts get in the way of a moronic rant, eh?

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Never let actual facts get in the way of a moronic rant, eh?

you clearly haven't--see the original BBC story. What is it with some of you people--Playschool finished early today??

 

[Hollis]

No time to do this justice just now, but why should another festival be able to pass itself off as a near Glasto alternative? And why should the much longer established Glastonbury Festival have to change its name in consequence?

Who cares! Those that KNOW wont. Those that DONT wont.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Don't you read? It's for SPECIFIC purposes and specific business items (e.g. festival merchandise) - not a general TM-ing of the town.

In other words, he can only use the TM when it relates to stuff to do with the festival, and can only claim infringement for those specific items, so someone calling their shop 'Glastonbury Crystal Healing' would not have to apply for permission to use the word 'Glastonbury'.

But that would be covered by the term 'Glastonbury Festival'--in which (narrow) case he shouldn't need the term Glastonbury on its own too. I am sure this is patently obvious, but some of you have reasons for not conceding this, and think that by jumping down my throat with a herd mentality you can get away with it. Not so--as the advert used to say 'these colours don't run'.

 

[Dubversion]

No time to do this justice just now, but why should another festival be able to pass itself off as a near Glasto alternative? And why should the much longer established Glastonbury Festival have to change its name in consequence?

he was JOKING!!!

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

you clearly haven't--see the original BBC story. What is it with some of you people--Playschool finished early today??

Jesus, can you fucking read?

Just in case you missed it last time:

List of goods or services

Class 09:
Recordings of sound or images; records, compact discs, mini discs, laser discs, digital video discs, digital audio recordings, audio cassettes, video cassettes; magnetic tape, computer software and firmware, computer multimedia products; magnetic and optical programmes bearing media; floppy discs, CD-ROM, interactive compact discs; computer games, video games, interactive games; computer software, sound or video recordings, or publications, in electronic form supplied on-line or from facilities provided on the Internet; digital music provided from the Internet; digital recordings of performing arts entertainment provided from the Internet; sound recordings and images downloadable from the Internet; all relating to festivals of the performing arts.

Class 16:
Promotional literature; programmes; flyers; leaflets; tickets and passes; all relating to festivals of the performing arts.

Class 25:
Clothing; footwear; headgear; t-shirts, caps, baseball caps, sweatshirts, jackets; all relating to festivals of the performing arts.

Class 41:
Organisation, promotion, production, management and conducting of performing arts entertainments and festivals, including such services provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet; organisation of events for fund raising; performance arts and musical entertainment services; festival services, performance of music, dance, comedy, theatre, poetry and circus entertainment, including such services provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet; production of radio and television programmes; performance of radio and television programmes; production and performance of sound recordings, image recordings, videos, films, concerts, shows; recording studio services; music and text publishing services; musical and visual entertainment provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet; providing digital music from the Internet; electronic games services provided by means of the Internet or other on-line services; information, education, consultancy and advisory services relating to any of the aforesaid services, including such services provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet.

 

[Dubversion]

jumping down my throat with a herd mentality you can get away with it.

ah, herd mentality. of course.

 

[Dougal]

I am a bit pissed off that this has got all shouty, please stop it.

I do think though that if the application was just to protect the festival, the only application would be for "Glastonbury festival" rather than that plus "Glastonbury" and "Glastonbury Vale".

 

[Dubversion]

I am a bit pissed off that this has got all shouty, please stop it.

well you can blame the bitter rantings of Larry for that

I do think though that if the application was just to protect the festival, the only application would be for "Glastonbury festival" rather than that plus "Glastonbury" and "Glastonbury Vale".

Eavis and his legal team aren't stupid, i imagine they know what they need to do to protect the festival and how NOT to impinge on innocent businesses in a community he's been a part of all his life.

 

[kyser_soze]

But that would be covered by the term 'Glastonbury Festival'--in which (narrow) case he shouldn't need the term Glastonbury on its own too. I am sure this is patently obvious, but some of you have reasons for not conceding this, and think that by jumping down my throat with a herd mentality you can get away with it. Not so--as the advert used to say 'these colours don't run'.

You're right it would, but thinking about it a little harder, it's generically known simply as 'Glastonbury' rather than 'Glastonbury Festival' - the crunch is going to come with the final application wording and the negotiations with the local CoC.

AFAIK it's not possible to blanket trademark OR copyright a town or place name for commercial purposes - you have to be specific and also show that failure to trademark could result in damage to the business commercially or it's 'good reputation' (so say someone set up another Glastonbury festival in their back garden and it was shit it could arguably damage the reputation of Glastonbury...)

 

[William of Walworth]

you clearly haven't--see the original BBC story. What is it with some of you people--Playschool finished early today??

Sorry Larry -- I agree with kyser's interpretation just above. The BBC article is very vaguely worded.

 

[moose]

In the interests of accuracy...

I'm not sure that all the trademark applications, categories, classes and other info posted in this thread have a lot to do with the particular application mentioned in the BBC article, btw, which dealt specifically with the Office of Harmonisation for the EU, so it would be wrong for the discussion to get too bogged down with those details.

 

[William of Walworth]

he was JOKING!!!

Obvious when you see BOTH (or more?) of his posts. I'd only seen the first one when I posted that ...

But feel free to think I'm humourless ...

 

[William of Walworth]

I'm not sure that all the trademark applications, categories, classes and other info posted in this thread have a lot to do with the particular application mentioned in the BBC article, btw, which dealt specifically with the Office of Harmonisation for the EU, so it would be wrong for the discussion to get too bogged down with those details.

Do you (or anyone?) know the EU-related implications though?