Re: [dvd-discuss] 120 years and still not in the public domain

[Jeremy Erwin <jerwin(at)ponymail.com>]

On Thursday, October 2, 2003, at 11:39  AM, Michael A Rolenz wrote:
> It's not copyright but trademark infringement :
> "Now the library group is suing the Library Hotel, accusing it of 
> trademark  infringement. "
>
> This may wind up having (or should) the same status as Kleenex. Yes 
> "Kleenex" is a trademark but it is also something used so commonly 
> that it is now a word. Having someone say "give me a Kleenex" in a 
> film should be considered free advertising rather than trademark 
> infringement whereas putting "Kleenex" on a box of paper tissues made 
> by someone else would be infringement since one would be confusing the 
> real "kleenex" with a competitors. I seriously doubt that ANY one 
> would confuse the DDC in a library with a decorative theme in a 
> Hotel...In this case, I hope the Judge sees fit to follow that line of 
> reasoning.
Some libraries do have an interest in maintaining a national standard. 
If all the libraries subscribing to a interlibrary loan program know 
that a particular book is filed under 323.156, book lending among 
libraries is more efficient. But if Library A has been subscribing to a 
OCLC list, and library B is using another classification service, then 
the book might just be filed under 401.342. Hence, the OCLC and its 
subscribing institutions have some interest in ensuring that the Dewey 
Classification system does not become generic.
Where is the Hotel getting its cataloging data anyway?
Jeremy