Posts: 11685
Joined: 2007-04-09
|
smoke a shisha in a park?
|
|
|
|
Posts: 791
Joined: 2008-10-28
|
m15try wrote:
He can do fuck all. Just don't use their lookbook pictures. Would've thought the fucking pleb would be concentrating more on the masses of ebay fakes rather than people buying legitimate stuff. A lot of brands can rid ebay of all of their fake products in minutes
This.
|
|
|
Posts: 59908
Joined: 2003-07-10
|
Tony wrote:
m15try wrote:
He can do fuck all. Just don't use their lookbook pictures. Would've thought the fucking pleb would be concentrating more on the masses of ebay fakes rather than people buying legitimate stuff. A lot of brands can rid ebay of all of their fake products in minutes
This.
+1
|
|
|
Posts: 2200
Joined: 2010-01-03
|
I ain't on FB (and know fuck all about it) so haven't seen the page however, using the name would be a breach of the 'Supreme' registered trademark (by name or pictorally) which is an arrestable offence and can carry a pretty hefty fine/imprisonment. Police and/or Trading Standards regulate the legislation. The legal stuff out of the way, if you change the page name to remove any reference to the brand name then there's fuck all they can do as (from what I'm aware of the page) all you're doing is reselling pre-owned (whether new or worn) items.
Additionally, first the company would have to get either body interested in investigating what in essence is (with all due respect) a minor breach of the legislation - they ain't gonna be interested. Supreme could bring out a private prosecution but i doubt very much that it'll happen as from what I'm aware they've been extremely lacking in any sort of brand protection so far although this will probably change pretty quickly due to the increasing popularity of the brand and its' lessening status as an 'underground label'. If it were me, I'd just change the name of the FB page to reflect the aforementioned and carry on as normal.
|
|
|
Posts: 500
Joined: 2011-08-22
|
 knowledge dropped
|
|
|
Posts: 6486
Joined: 2011-06-09
|
First off, call him a cunt. then type some laughs and maybe a few Dolan gifs, then proceed in calling him an even bigger cunt.
Change the page name (call it clothes for cunts) and use your own photos. He could never find out who you are as Facebook would never give that information out to him (DPA98). Plus its not illegal to sell products on facebook or promote them (obviously), reselling clothes at a profit is nothing frowned upon either, aslong as its not fake, its fine.
I would have thought they would be putting more pressure on the eBay sellers (abeit there is hundreds of them) selling fakes, as this is actually illegal as its a registered trademark. As Burt said, they must not finance a legal team to deal with problems, as youre only getting a store manager rather than an actual lawyer employed by them.
Facebook may close the group down though for violations of their Intellectual Property though (if hes still being a cunt), so just remove the banner with the box logo, any reference to the Supreme name in the info, title etc.) as its all trademarked. I don't know how the lookbook pictures work though, as they are featured on websites like hypebeast etc. So they must give permission to use them to people/websites.
I wouldnt send it to a fake account to make admin either, as I think that goes against the 'community standards' of Facebook.
|
|
|
Posts: 1405
Joined: 2012-01-19
|
Yeah i would just avoid any explicit reference to the brand on the page as well as i wouldn't use any of their stock pics.
|
|
|
Posts: 4515
Joined: 2005-05-03
|
He can't find out who you are and unless Supreme themselves file something about the copyright it is not getting shut down any time soon.
Leave it up and tell him to do one.
P.S Correct me if i am wrong, but Supreme is not a term you can copyright, fair enough he can ask you to remove the images though.
|
|
|
Posts: 4912
Joined: 2005-07-22
|
Thanks for all the information guys. I'm just going to remove all the pictures, and change the name of the page. Leaving no reference to supreme anywhere, then I'm gonna hand it over to someone else.
Even if they do somehow find out whos account the page is registered too, its freshflows (RIP), he was the one that started the whole thing!
|
|
|
Posts: 1972
Joined: 2010-11-26
|
change the Supreme to supreme, done
|
|
|
Posts: 2200
Joined: 2010-01-03
|
sj99 wrote:
change the Supreme to supreme, done
Nope. If the use is '...likely to be mistaken for a registered trade mark...' then you'd still be in the wrong. As the use relates to a FB page that predominantly (or even exclusively - I dunno) re-sells Supreme items then I'd suggest it would be likely to be mistaken for...
|
|
|
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2010-12-15
|
Anto wrote:
Yeah i would just avoid any explicit reference to the brand on the page as well as i wouldn't use any of their stock pics.
good ideas man, didn't think of that.
|
|
|
Posts: 127
Joined: 2009-08-17
|
Why has this fella got such a sandy vagina? And why would a shop's branch manager be handling the cease and desist letters and copyright details (albeit "off the record") for the company? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 29/03/2009 - 10:20pm
