Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
How shocking that you have no respect for intellectual property rights.
The case was settled out of court, so the Gap certainly took some culpability in casting a "Look-a-Like" without permission. |
The cluster**** that current IP law and handling of it is costing our economy far more than piracy is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
You must be joking.
I understand that most people do not understand the concept of I.P. and have no regard for it whatsoever (as evidence by the billions of illegal downloads of software, music and movies).
But are you actually contending that The Gap innocently hired a Kim Kardashian Look-a-like, sent her to hair and makeup to make look even more like Kardashian, and it was not a coincidence?
Not a chance.
By doing so, they're implying that Kim is a spokesperson for and an endorser of The GAP, but without her permission. That is an I.P. infringement, plain and simple.
|
You must be joking yourself. Bullshit. Did she trademark or patent her ass? Did the GAP ever state that it was Kim? Then she had no ****ing case. Hell even then they should be able to claim satire and say they were poking fun at her vapid image.
They settled because IP law and courts that handle them is so horrendously ****ing broken that they'd probably spend years dealing with a trial over this and it could set a precedent that could **** them over in the future. Cheaper and easier for them to just throw some money at this wannabe failed pornstar.