I have to admit I'd never really imagined putting the words "Mary Kay, Inc." and "SCA" in the same sentence before. We do have a diverse membership, don't we.
One thing I'll add here - there is a legal requirement that the rights holder "vigorously defend" their assertion of rights. In the famous "Disney sues daycare" imbroglio (Disney sued some small daycare which had a huge, unauthorized mural of Disney characters on its wall), Disney lawyers pointed out (correctly, without a commentary on the law itself) that the law basically requires rights holders to make every effort to stop infringement wherever they find it if they don't want their rights to pass into the public domain as abandoned. They can ignore use that is "minor and inconsequential" but little else.
Rowling's tearful testimony aside, therefore, there is an argument to be made that the law as it stands more or less forced them to at least make the attempt to stop publication.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 05:37 pm (UTC)One thing I'll add here - there is a legal requirement that the rights holder "vigorously defend" their assertion of rights. In the famous "Disney sues daycare" imbroglio (Disney sued some small daycare which had a huge, unauthorized mural of Disney characters on its wall), Disney lawyers pointed out (correctly, without a commentary on the law itself) that the law basically requires rights holders to make every effort to stop infringement wherever they find it if they don't want their rights to pass into the public domain as abandoned. They can ignore use that is "minor and inconsequential" but little else.
Rowling's tearful testimony aside, therefore, there is an argument to be made that the law as it stands more or less forced them to at least make the attempt to stop publication.