CONTEST PART II
This contest has ended.
Contests I and II have ended. These prizes are no longer available.
SECTION 5 ANSWERS:
We are happy to announce that this portion of the contest is over, and the winner (who has chosen to remain anonymous) has been notified, so if you didn’t hear from us, sorry you didn’t win!!
In post 1 Bobbie says that you’ve never explained your disclaimers, but in post 2, you explained what the disclaimers meant. Bobbie did know about it, because she commented on the same topic in post 3.
In post 8 Bobbie says that any artist using thread bear isn’t encroaching on Thread Bears®, but in posts 5-7, three different lawyers said:
-if you make these products, you can’t call them THREAD BEARS
-if you market yourself as “thread bears” it may be infringement,
-and that the trademark owners have the right to police “thread bears.”
Post 1: Bobbie’s most recent comment on our blog in regards to disclaimers from 10/3/13
Post 2: Our comment on Teddy Talk in response to a Berta’s topic about our disclaimers.
Post 3: Bobbie’s comment on that same discussion
To view this whole discussion, you may do so here.
Post 4: A publicly posted question asked by Berta’s friend, Debbie
Posts 5-7: Lawyers’ Responses to Debbie’s question
If you would like to see this discussion in full, you may do so here.
Post 8: Another excerpt from Bobbie’s comment on here from 10/3. She’s quoting our statement in the first line
Berta had publicly asked a lawyer this question 7 months ago (we’ve pulled this post out of our final section of the contest, below. Berta is the ‘Customer’ and KKPC is the lawyer):
We should also point out that she asked her question right after we had clarified what disclaimers are on Teddy Talk (posted in the last section of contest).
Now, Berta has commented on the contest and posted a disclaimer to this answer she received. She is trying to down-play the validity of this answer. However, it does need to be noted that KKPC IS a lawyer and is qualified to give the answer:
Also, we should note that she even PAID for the answer:
So yes, she may have received a disclaimer for this answer. The disclaimer just stresses to the customer that this lawyer is not legally bound to represent in any proceedings. These lawyers are truly lawyers.
Which brings us to our next point. Berta has a lawyer listed on her trademark application. So, why hasn’t she asked him about disclaimers??
Well, we are sure she already has the information, since we have already contacted her lawyer. And, we know he forwarded the information and clarified things, because it is what her lawyer would do. And, since she knows the truth, why has she continued to lie about it for the last 7 months??
If you would like to read this entire discussion, you may do so here.