Don’t ya just love the rhetoric?
First Stephane Dion decries Jennifer Wright’s legal action as ‘DEPLORABLE’, and that he is "willing to fight in court to keep the "green shift" policy name that is attracting attention to the Liberals." (Gazette)
Then he turns tells reporters that "in a practical way we are ready to work with this businesswoman."
So which is it, Mr. Milquetoast?
LoL…………….very acrobatic that Dion, gotta love those summersults, he would make the Cirque performers blush.
I have to disagree with the 8.75 million part, that seems to be going a bit over the top.
It’s too bad you live in Canada because Dion would never have chance to be in office.
That 45 pound girly man makes Canadians look like cartoon charchters.
He just does not get it !! Judging from their reactions to all of this from the start…they will expect compromise from her….I hope she sticks to her guns and keeps on with it. There is nothing to negotiate anyway.
And, moreover, if Dion’s head is in the sand about this issue…can you imagine the tough road for Canadians if he is ever in office? It’s too awful to contemplate. The arrogance is astounding and is like a second skin. hmmmm – only a certain species sheds their skin. oh well….
Thanks Mr. Bush, lol. I loved it when you called that beer store in Pennsylvania, eh?
search youtube “george bush beer store”
Dion seems totally incapable of understanding the issue of trademark infringement.
What planet has he been living on lately? I mean can you imagine this stumble-bum running the country !
I mean can you imagine this stumble-bum running the country !
I can just see it now:
“Ladeez and gentlemen, I have decided to rename dis country Da France!“
“Dion seems totally incapable of understanding the issue of trademark infringement.”
And just what part do you think he does not understand?
Its illegal for one thing.
Thw Liberals defence of this issue is quite strange…they keep going on about how they own the domain “thegreenshift”…big frigging deal! A domain name and a trademark are two very different things.
The amount she is sueing for seems excessive, but I have no doubt she will win…unless Dion can get her to drop the case by offering her a senate position or something…we all know they can’t offer her money, because, well, they don’t have any.
When was the last time the liberals and their henchmen MSM ever worked for canada and canadians; I thought they stole and corrupt this country.
Jennifer Wright just want her rights to be respected unfortunately respect is not in the liberal vocabulary.
What bothers me is the way the MSM are treating Jennifer Wright Where are the big headlines in front page “Miss Wrights takes liberals to court or the liberal abuses a company’s name” or……
We don’t expect you to understand Gayle. Many posts have already explained it…duh!!
hehehhe I know I won’t pass moderation…but it felt good to write it…
Correction: I thought they’(liberals)’ stole and corrupt this country
Too simplistic an answer hollinm.
In order to sue for damages there must be actual damages (that she can prove, not just what she claims).
She will also have to show there is confusion between a political policy and a company that sells napkins.
So, no, it is not just that it “is illegal”. It is only illegal in certain circumstances.
hehehhe I know I won’t pass moderation…but it felt good to write it…
Actually I’m going to be taking a break from blogging the next few days so Comment Moderation will be on for a while. I’ll check the comments once a day or so.
In order to sue for damages there must be actual damages (that she can prove, not just what she claims).
She will also have to show there is confusion between a political policy and a company that sells napkins.
isn’t damages just part of the claim?
whether she can claim damages is up in the air, but I’m guessing that one can not just use someone else’s business name without repercussion.
Your summary of what green shift inc. does is simplistic, too.
“Sells napkins”?!?!
Obviously, you have not been to her site if this all you think her company does. In fact, I would suggest it is quite a demeaning description.
I know she sells more than that Tori. I also knows that what her company does not do is promote a political tax policy that suggests a shift from income taxes to taxing carbon.
In other words, they do two vastly different things, and this means it will be hard for her to establish damages, or to prove that people could be confused between the two.
Okay Gayle, you’re apparently on full spin cycle today.
In fact, all she has to prove is that the Libs encroached on her trademark. That’s IT. Prove that and they’re done like dinner… and I’m pretty sure that’s a slam dunk. Whether or not they’ll be on the hook for $8+ million is another question entirely as I doubt the judge would find there was THAT much damage done. But there will be SOME punitive action… that I can pretty much guarantee.
Now let’s put the legalities aside for the moment. What about the ethical component? I know I know… Liberals and ethics are like oil and water. Regardless… don’t you think there was some onus on their part to do their due diligence to make sure the name was unencumbered? I mean forget the effect it might have on anyone else – just from a “cover your ass” perspective it’s a smart thing to do. But no… they arrogantly decided they can do whatever they want regardless of any legal or ethical consequences because hey… they ARE the natural governing party of this country donchaknow? And if they can get away with bilking Canadians for millions over the reign of Cretin surely some little piss-ant business will roll over for them.
“In order to sue for damages there must be actual damages (that she can prove, not just what she claims)”.
It is my understanding Jennifer Wright has numerous e-mails to support her claims.
Here is what another Liberal poster on a blog said: “The Green shift inc lawsuit is a joke…green shift will survive and that little broad will simply fade away”
Typical Liberal party hack and typical of the Liberal party itself. Arrogance and entitiled to their entitlement is what the Liberal party is all about.
By the way Gayle another poster answered the question. It is illegal to steal the tradename of some other company. Othewise it makes a farce of registering corporate names etc.
Gayle your remarks are pathetic. Your SD has steamrolled over a legitimate registered enterprise for political gain and “tinks he can doo dat”. All this will come to fester on the Lieberals sooner if not later. ” It’s not heazy to make priorotiez wen you are trying to find a brand name dat’s so Green Greener dan dat Elizabet May lady i work wit!!”"
gayle,
when i first went looking for details on the lpc plan, i typed in http://www.greenshift.ca.
not a word of a lie.
and obviously i came across Ms Wright’s company’s page. I was confused…did not see the lpc logo, so I googled “green shift” and that’s when I noticed the diff.
That’s all the confusion you need. People go looking for dion’s plan, type in the other url, and there ya go. The lpc even KNEW this was going to happen as they “warned” her the night before that she may have more hits than normal.
But now, future clients-who may not want to be involved in the politcal hay- may choose not to use her company if they feel the sharing of the same name ENDORSES the lpc plan.
get it?
Not to mention her current client list, who probably woke up that day with questions on whether Green Shift Inc was getting involved in politics.
Also, I bet anything that if I tried to register a company that did consulting work (like a pollster) and named it McDonald’s, the real McDonald’s would sue my ass to the curb. Can’t confuse polling and hamburgers, but it is the hijacking of the name that is problematic.
Gayle, I just don’t get how you can see that there is nothing wrong with what dion and the lpc are doing to this company. the optics are horrid- a party that is attempting to “greenwash” our tax system by taking the name of a company that is actually doing something beneficial to protect the environment. And the way they treated her by informing her the night before that this was how it was gonna be…it REEKS of arrogance.
From the National Post:
“George A. Wowk, an intellectual and copyright lawyer at Calgary firm Burnet, Duckworth & Palmer LLP said that the fact that Ms. Wright has applied for a trademark, though it is pending approval, still affords her some protection.
But in order to succeed in making a case for infringement, Ms. Wright will have to demonstrate that the Liberals’ use of the term “Green Shift” leads people to mistake or misunderstand the relationship between the organization, Green Shift Inc., and the Liberals’ Green Shift platform.
“In the marketplace now, we have Apple computers, Apple Auto Glass, Apple Records and all those sorts of things, and generally they can coexist in the marketplace without confusion,” Mr. Wowk said. “The basis of trademark law is confusion, so [the central issue will be] whether or not there’s confusion in the marketplace.”
The court may also consider the fact that Mr. Dion’s Green Shift program is a political, rather than commercial, interest, he added.”
Gayle your kool-aid drinking Liberal days have caused a fog. What don’t you understand? The Liberal party infringed and took for their own a registered trademark. In Canada there are laws preventing that from happening. Try stealing the McDonalds trademark and see what happens. There is no difference in the eyes of the law.
As for damages who knows what a court would assess. However, I assume she has evidence that the stealing of her trademark has hurt her company. To what extent will be decided by a court if it gets that far.
The optics of this thing are terrible for the Liberal party. They stole a trademark name and then arrogantly said it would help Ms. Wright and she should be happy and get the hell out of the way. Dion arrogantly called her that businesswoman and said her action was deporable. Anymore arrogant you cannot be in my judgement.
Now they are attacking a small business, a woman and dismissing her as some sort of coot. Look at the comments of Garth Turner on his blog and David McGuinty in his TV appearances. Those will be shown in court to show the disregard that the Liberal party had for this female entrepreneur and her corporate name.
Damages there will be some. Any amount is too much for the financially strapped Liberal party.
“As for damages who knows what a court would assess.”
You don’t seem to understand. She will have to establish that she lost business because of this. Nasty emails will not suffice.
All this publicity has likely given her exposure that she never would have obtained otherwise, and thus it is possible her business will actually increase.
I am not suggesting she will not be able to establish damages, but it is not as simple as “you used my name so give me money”. She will have to do more than that.
“Gayle, I just don’t get how you can see that there is nothing wrong with what dion and the lpc are doing to this company.”
I never said that. Like I said in the post above, it is not as simple as “they used my name”.
She will have to show, based on the income of the company, that she suffered an economic loss because of this. That means she will have to show that the confusion you experienced actually resulted in the loss of business.
In other words, some of you need to take a step back and stop assuming this is a done deal. It isn’t.
gayle,
there is a diff between Apple, Apple Auto Glass and Apple Records.
I’m guessing that the auto glass place never calls itself just “apple”, nor does apple records.
the only diff between the two green shifts is the “the” in the url of one of them.
They took her business name. There is a protocol in which to register your business name, and when you do you have to check to see if someone else has already used it.
the LPC checked, and used it anyway.
and it does sound like you are seriously condoning it, which is disappointing.
Gayle a trademark infringement is exactly that “somebody used by name”. I use the analogy if someone used the McDonalds name do you think they would stand by and allow that to happen?
You seem incapable of accepting the fact that the Liberal party may have infringed on a trademark that is already registered to a small business and has refused to voluntarily cease and desist in using that trademark.
Whether there are damages etc is a specious argument to make.
Once again forget about the legalities the fact that this woman held a press conference, called out the Liberal party and named names like Garth Turner will be seen by the public as cynical, arrogant and a signal to Canadians that the Liberals still think they are entitled to their entitlements.
Gayle. “nasty e-mails will not suffice”.
Nasty e-mails with the intent to inflict injury or damage would suffice. It’s called evidence!
“You don’t seem to understand. She will have to establish that she lost business because of this. Nasty emails will not suffice.”
Gayle – the fact that you are trying to defend the liberals in this speaks volumes about your true loyalties.
If the Tories had done this you would be the first one over here screaming about fair play and ethics and bullying and how the Tories have literally STOLEN this woman’s livelihood.
But because it is the Liberals – well, for a non-liberal – you seem unsurprisingly defensive.
The optics of this are what is at play Gayle – the optics and as you and I both know; optics can go a long way in winning or losing.
The optics of youdefending this situation Gayle shows us all that you are actually a Liberal in NDP clothing.
Boy – lots of interesting opinions here.
If you don’t mind, I will accept the legal opinion of the lawyer that I quoted above. Somehow I suspect he has a better grasp of trademark law than any of you.
“Gayle – the fact that you are trying to defend the liberals in this speaks volumes about your true loyalties.”
I am not defending anyone. I am presenting facts. I am sorry if you want to believe that this is a simple matter, but it isn’t.
This is what I said:
“I am not suggesting she will not be able to establish damages, but it is not as simple as “you used my name so give me money”. She will have to do more than that.”
If you think that means I am defending the liberals, there is nothing I can do to help you.
“If you don’t mind, I will accept the legal opinion of the lawyer that I quoted above. Somehow I suspect he has a better grasp of trademark law than any of you.”
and there are other trademark lawyers who feel Ms Wright has a very strong case…do their opinions have any merit with you?
Tori – my point is that this lawyer has said what she has to establish in order to win this lawsuit.
People here have claimed that it is a done deal merely because of the use of the name. They also do not seem to understand the whole concept of damages.
The fact is none of us know if she has a strong case, because we do not know what kind of damages she will be able to establish. They do not know if she has suffered a loss in business because of any “confusion”.
You will note the lawyer I quoted merely set out what she would have to do to make her case. He said nothing about the merits of that case. Any lawyer who opines on the merits would be doing so in a vacuum, as that lawyer would not have access to evidence of her damages.