07-13-2011, 09:08 AM
Why is the letter addressed to Mr Johnston? 
If legitimate (note several typos and other errors including the salutation above), the letter appears to be part of a blanket campaign, since they do not specify what his specific infraction is ("reproduction, distribution AND/OR display"), although they apparently appended a list of materials.
I also find it odd that the lawyer takes time to explain she is a trademark lawyer, but doesn't specifically outline the relationship between Caterpillar and EMD (recent purchase from GM).
The US Registration number quoted in the letter is here:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4004:21frc9.5.63">http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f= ... 1frc9.5.63</a><!-- m -->
Note that the record has not been updated so the owner information does not necessarily reflect the information in the letter. Not something that I'd leave out-of-date if I was going after those who allegedly are violating my rights.
Here's an interesting page on copyright and trademarks: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#patent">http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-g ... tml#patent</a><!-- m -->
Since George is not using the trademark EMD to represent something else, I am not sure that there is a specific trademark violation. EMD/Caterpillar might accuse him of distributing copyrighted works, but there does not appear to be a trademark violation.
I would believe that what George has done could fall under fair use of copyright material, although maybe not if he's posted the entire document. However, scaling back the material to a cover page or something like that should suffice to protect him.
George's own copyright position is explained here: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://rr-fallenflags.org/submit.html">http://rr-fallenflags.org/submit.html</a><!-- m -->. It's a little confusing, but he's covered the basics of recognizing the rights of the creator of the work (i.e. photographs in most cases).
I wish the list of materials they refer to in the letter was available. I wonder if George wrote back?
I agree that the "UP approach" is not the best way to encourage support and interest in one's products...
Andrew
If legitimate (note several typos and other errors including the salutation above), the letter appears to be part of a blanket campaign, since they do not specify what his specific infraction is ("reproduction, distribution AND/OR display"), although they apparently appended a list of materials.
I also find it odd that the lawyer takes time to explain she is a trademark lawyer, but doesn't specifically outline the relationship between Caterpillar and EMD (recent purchase from GM).
The US Registration number quoted in the letter is here:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4004:21frc9.5.63">http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f= ... 1frc9.5.63</a><!-- m -->
Note that the record has not been updated so the owner information does not necessarily reflect the information in the letter. Not something that I'd leave out-of-date if I was going after those who allegedly are violating my rights.
Here's an interesting page on copyright and trademarks: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#patent">http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-g ... tml#patent</a><!-- m -->
Since George is not using the trademark EMD to represent something else, I am not sure that there is a specific trademark violation. EMD/Caterpillar might accuse him of distributing copyrighted works, but there does not appear to be a trademark violation.
I would believe that what George has done could fall under fair use of copyright material, although maybe not if he's posted the entire document. However, scaling back the material to a cover page or something like that should suffice to protect him.
George's own copyright position is explained here: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://rr-fallenflags.org/submit.html">http://rr-fallenflags.org/submit.html</a><!-- m -->. It's a little confusing, but he's covered the basics of recognizing the rights of the creator of the work (i.e. photographs in most cases).
I wish the list of materials they refer to in the letter was available. I wonder if George wrote back?
I agree that the "UP approach" is not the best way to encourage support and interest in one's products...
Andrew