I don't know maybe this form of humor is just too far over my head, but all I see is someone repeating the same joke 14 times over 4 days.
I appreciate NE’s resilience and resolve to let Gibson know just precisely what ...(can’t insult other companies, forum rules)... they are.
I showed this thread to my wife, a civil lawyer and fervent bass player, and she thought it was funny for two reasons - the first being the irony, the second being she says, and I quote, you have an "imaginative take on the subject of copyright law" the she finds is "loosely based on reality and the American legal system".
I showed this thread to my wife, a civil lawyer and fervent bass player, and she thought it was funny for two reasons - the first being the irony, the second being she says, and I quote, you have an "imaginative take on the subject of copyright law" the she finds is "loosely based on reality and the American legal system".
I consulted a lawyer decades ago about forming a 501(C)3 non-profit and the guy lent me one of his books on the subject. When I took it back I asked why wasn't law cut and dried, instead of all the beating around the bush. His reply? "Because then it wouldn't be interpretable." I pondered that for a second, and said "That's why everyone hates lawyers. You guys make laws vague on purpose so you'll have jobs in the future". And he smiled.... evilly. I paid my $100 and fled.
I'm glad I decided to switch from pursing a career in law to one in engineering.
Well considering "Copywright" is an entirely different form of intellectual property and governed by a separate office from Patents and Trademarks -which is the subject of this thread, I suspect you misquoted your wife -or her legal education is loosely based on reality also.
Either way, glad you got a giggle.
but for everyone here:
US Copywright is administered by the US Copyright office under the auspices and management of the Library of Congress and no part of the Gibson suits references this sort of infringement (at least in the Texas filing)
Whereas the US Patent and Trademark office is inside the US department of Commerce and the court filing references these infringements
So long as were pointing out tiny insubstantial mistakes, you spelled "copyright" wrong twice and your capitalization is spotty.
and you're still entirely wrong. :lmao:
Yo, ease the negativity.