31 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: The history of the /r/xkcd kerfuffle.
Nope. Clarkson has no claim to *TopGear* because he doesn't own the trademark, the BBC does. And they *do* both own the trademark for a number of categories *and* enforce their rights[1](PDF). Furthermore, the BBC rarely acts, especially on matters involving TopGear. Non-commercial use would require *at least* active holocaust denialism *and* high-profit baby snuff video promotion.
1: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tm/legal/decisions/inter1999/o25299.pdf
Note that this is *TRADEMARK*, not copyright. There is clear confusion and that is also *intended*, meaning Randall has all the argument he needs. If you have time to read the PDF above, you'll see that a known trademark doesn't even necessarily have to have been properly "registered" with a federal authority; widespread familiarity is enough. In the case of TopGear, an audience of 5 million weekly (for 6-10 weeks a year) was sufficient. If this was 1997, xkcd's *AWW-SUM K3\/L HITT KO\/NTER* would've broken every dial-up provider's T1 inside three minutes of the Wednesday morning release.
Comment by [deleted] at 09/02/2014 at 20:01 UTC
9 upvotes, 1 direct replies
But does Jezza have a claim to /r/JeremyClarkson ?