Freecycling

Fighting for freerecyling

Pro Bono goes only so far…

According to Beal it seems that the original court case has no bearing on their trademark claims. Then why did they EVER bother to take the case to court? How is it that a court case has been around two years of wrangling? If the whole thing was irrelevant then – why? Continue reading

Advertisements

October 6, 2007 Posted by | freecycle | , , , , | 1 Comment

We are not here to try to close TFN, and never were

If I can quote from the 43(B)log post regarding the Oey versus TFN decision in favour of Oey,

Also, Oey didn’t disparage TFN’s goods or services; rather, many of his statements “appear aimed at ensuring the ongoing success of TFN and its services.” He said things like, “Let everyone know that TFN does not need to control freecycling for TFN to be successful”; “[Keeping the term ‘freecycle’ in the public domain] fits well with a ‘viral’ marketing approach to freecycle. People hear about it and want to know where it came from–which will lead back to [TFN] without strong trademark enforcement. It will also generate lots of goodwill”; and “My alternative also has consequences but I firmly believe it is a much better choice for [TFN] in the long run.” (TFN might consider itself damned with faint praise.) Continue reading

September 28, 2007 Posted by | freecycle | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Unfortunately TFN lost the case against Tim Oey

Well, I say unfortunately.  I guess the result will be seen as unfortunate if you are one of TPTB in TFN.  If however you are me, then in fact YOU WANT TO SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS.

The Freecycle Network did not just lose, but they lost on all counts.  You can read more at the Ninth Circuit Blog in which is a  link to the PDF that has the complete decision.

September 27, 2007 Posted by | legal, trademark, yahoogroups | , | 2 Comments