Diddy rips off Pentagram

Out of context: Reply #62

• Started
• Last post
• 105 Responses

• neowe0

  in regards to the McDonalds M...

  something tells me seduction wasn't registered as a company with market intentions through uspto.gov so the artwork as a whole does not constitute a logomark representing company interests in any part of the world.

  now if that same seduction were trademarked as a logotype for say a perfume or a clothing company, the company would have infringement rights to protect and possibly loss of revenue claims

  but again as the word itself is wholly different it is no different than all the designs that look like the coca cola logo but do not say coca cola

  also, in regards to the mcdonalds m, reminds me of this...
  

  

  totally cheeky, but i always thought the bigger problem with this was the use of the trademarked tag line of i'm lovin' it

  neowe 0Permalink

  UpvoteDownvote

  Flag

  • from http://bpcares.co.uk…neowe
  • there's no problem with parody and critisismDodecahedron
  • but what does mcds have to do with an oil spill? seems derrogatoryneowe

  Show [[ numHiddenNotes ]] more notesAdd Note

  SaveCancel

View thread