Section 5 Answers!

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
 
 
Additional Info:
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. 
 
See the results of the extra credit on the Gossiper’s Page.
Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Section 5 Answers!

  1. DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.

  2. “Well, we are sure she already has the information, since we have already contacted her lawyer”

    Wonder why you not post here on your Blog what you exactly wrote to MY lawyer and what MY lawyer responded with?

  3. Berta, yes these are your lawyers, not ours. We wrote one of your lawyers to ask him (since he is one of your lawyers) to inform you of what the laws were, and to clarify disclaimers to you, since you were hanging on to Bobbie's non-professional, inexperienced opinions. We didn't write him and ask him to respond.

    So again we ask, did your lawyer(s) give you permission to use our trademark(s)? Is that what you are implying?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s