[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] OT: Copyright on ingredient list?
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] OT: Copyright on ingredient list?
- From: John Galt <galt(at)inconnu.isu.edu>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 11:48:57 -0600 (MDT)
- In-reply-to: <7D15156EB67BD5119D180002554C2D0E32DEFD@zhnte01.blair.cdpoly.cargill.com>
- Mail-followup-to: galt@inconnu.isu.edu
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
http://www.guerrillanews.com/cocakarma/
Basically, Coke copyrights it's packaging materials, or tries to.
On Fri, 31 May 2002, Kroll, Dave wrote:
>Sort of offtopic, but it’s amazing how the more of this you pay attention
>to, the more you see.
>
>I was drinking a can of Diet Coke® yesterday, and noticed that “near” the
>ingredient list was a copyright notice. (©1997). It was perpendicular to
>the ingredients, so may not have been referring to them, but that’s what it
>seemed to be notifying. My can of Pepsi®, on the other hand, had some
>trademark notices, but no copyright notice.
>
>I wonder what Coke is trying to protect, and why they are bothering. If I
>were to manufacture a cola with the same ranking of ingredients (and
>therefore the same ingredient list), would they try to sue me for
>infringement? Or do I have to invoke a fair use defense in order to state,
>“Diet Coke contains Aspartame”? Bizarre.
>
>
>David Kroll
>
- --
Pardon me, but you have obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a
damn.
email galt@inconnu.isu.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76
iD8DBQE8+QkM+ZSKG3nWr3ARApe/AJsEtviJQPHjHd0vOqz2JQiY5cj2OgCdGnYm
PpyWgwiK04gLetCMghqe8vQ=
=nvKl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----