Good ol wal-mart
Mr Wiggl3s
06-12-2006, 04:27 PM
Wal-Mart uses the smiley face on staff uniforms and promotional signs
Wal-Mart is embroiled in a legal dispute over the smiley face image which it wants to trademark in the US.
A Frenchman who claims to have invented the yellow smiley face back in 1968 is opposing the US retail giant's move.
For some, the image is a reminder of 1970s counter-culture, for others, a useful shorthand when sending e-mails.
But since 1996, Wal-Mart has used the image in the US on uniforms and promotional signs, and it wants sole rights to it in the US retail sector.
Global rights
Franklin Loufrani - just one of a number of people who profess to have invented the image - has marketed the sign since the early 1970s.
It's a mark that we have a tremendous investment in and is very closely identified with our company
Wal-Mart
He and his London-based company SmileyWorld today own the rights to the logo in more than 80 countries around the world.
The US is not included in this list, and SmileyWorld and Wal-Mart are now at loggerheads before the US Patent and Trademark Office.
A final decision is expected in August.
Ironic
Until now the smiley face had been considered in the public domain in the US, and therefore free for anyone to use.
Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley told the Los Angeles Times that it had not moved to register the trademark until Mr Loufrani had threatened to do so.
"It is kind of ironic that this whole dispute is about a smiley face," said Mr Simley.
"But in the end, it is what it is: it's a mark that we have a tremendous investment in and is very closely identified with our company."
SmileyWorld said it did not have anyone who could comment on Monday.
Disputed creation
The authorship of the smiley face is hotly disputed.
While Mr Loufrani says he came up with the image in 1968, American Harvey Ball contends that he first designed the logo in 1963.
Mr Ball, a Massachusetts graphic artist, claims he devised the cartoon to cheer up disgruntled staff at a newly merged insurance firm.
Another American, Seattle-based advertiser David Stern, also claims to have invented the image.
Mr Sterns says he devised the sign in 1967 as part of an advertisement campaign for financial services firm Washington Mutual.
Both Mr Ball and Mr Stern further say that they did not think of trademarking the image at the time.
Since the 1970s, the smiley face has been adopted by a number of different groups.
It appears on number plates in the US state of Kentucky, has featured on an American postage stamp and was the unofficial symbol of the late 1980s acid house dance music movement.
The image was also spoofed in the 1994 movie Forest Gump, in which the title character inadvertently comes up with the logo by rubbing his wet and dirty face on a white T-shirt.
-----
Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4984138.stm)
Odd
Wal-Mart is embroiled in a legal dispute over the smiley face image which it wants to trademark in the US.
A Frenchman who claims to have invented the yellow smiley face back in 1968 is opposing the US retail giant's move.
For some, the image is a reminder of 1970s counter-culture, for others, a useful shorthand when sending e-mails.
But since 1996, Wal-Mart has used the image in the US on uniforms and promotional signs, and it wants sole rights to it in the US retail sector.
Global rights
Franklin Loufrani - just one of a number of people who profess to have invented the image - has marketed the sign since the early 1970s.
It's a mark that we have a tremendous investment in and is very closely identified with our company
Wal-Mart
He and his London-based company SmileyWorld today own the rights to the logo in more than 80 countries around the world.
The US is not included in this list, and SmileyWorld and Wal-Mart are now at loggerheads before the US Patent and Trademark Office.
A final decision is expected in August.
Ironic
Until now the smiley face had been considered in the public domain in the US, and therefore free for anyone to use.
Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley told the Los Angeles Times that it had not moved to register the trademark until Mr Loufrani had threatened to do so.
"It is kind of ironic that this whole dispute is about a smiley face," said Mr Simley.
"But in the end, it is what it is: it's a mark that we have a tremendous investment in and is very closely identified with our company."
SmileyWorld said it did not have anyone who could comment on Monday.
Disputed creation
The authorship of the smiley face is hotly disputed.
While Mr Loufrani says he came up with the image in 1968, American Harvey Ball contends that he first designed the logo in 1963.
Mr Ball, a Massachusetts graphic artist, claims he devised the cartoon to cheer up disgruntled staff at a newly merged insurance firm.
Another American, Seattle-based advertiser David Stern, also claims to have invented the image.
Mr Sterns says he devised the sign in 1967 as part of an advertisement campaign for financial services firm Washington Mutual.
Both Mr Ball and Mr Stern further say that they did not think of trademarking the image at the time.
Since the 1970s, the smiley face has been adopted by a number of different groups.
It appears on number plates in the US state of Kentucky, has featured on an American postage stamp and was the unofficial symbol of the late 1980s acid house dance music movement.
The image was also spoofed in the 1994 movie Forest Gump, in which the title character inadvertently comes up with the logo by rubbing his wet and dirty face on a white T-shirt.
-----
Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4984138.stm)
Odd
vinnym86
06-12-2006, 04:30 PM
...:)
-The Stig-
06-12-2006, 04:54 PM
...:)
:1:
:1:
2.2 Straight six
06-12-2006, 04:58 PM
...:)
i have no idea what's going on...
i have no idea what's going on...
Damien
06-12-2006, 05:06 PM
so, no one before 1963 drew a smiliy face??? :confused:
:)
:)
G-man422
06-12-2006, 05:23 PM
I created the smiley face........I'll sue you ALL!!!!
Rally Sport
06-12-2006, 05:31 PM
I created the smiley face........I'll sue you ALL!!!!
You didnt.. but your avatar sure does have alot of em in there..
You didnt.. but your avatar sure does have alot of em in there..
-The Stig-
06-12-2006, 05:35 PM
i have no idea what's going on...
you must be towely.
you must be towely.
Heep
06-12-2006, 05:38 PM
Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley
:lol2: I thought that said John Smiley
:lol2: I thought that said John Smiley
Toksin
06-12-2006, 05:42 PM
Rally Sport
06-12-2006, 05:44 PM
Fuck Wal Mart.
You should be saying "fuck (Whatever the dudes name was)" because he wants to copyright it just to get easy money from Wal*Mart.
You should be saying "fuck (Whatever the dudes name was)" because he wants to copyright it just to get easy money from Wal*Mart.
-The Stig-
06-12-2006, 05:47 PM
I'd rather support some dude on the smiley face, than WalMart.
But, the smiley should remain a public domain. I mean, It's a smiley...
But, the smiley should remain a public domain. I mean, It's a smiley...
G-man422
06-12-2006, 05:54 PM
^ I completly agree
stone_mound_camaro
06-12-2006, 05:57 PM
You're all wrong!!! Forrest Gump created the smiley
Chiquae07
06-12-2006, 07:05 PM
:useless: :useless: :useless: :useless: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :useless: :useless: :useless: :useless: :useless:
00accord44
06-12-2006, 07:36 PM
But what about all the other faces???
:banghead: :disappoin :uhoh: :eek7: :sly: :chair: :greddy2: :dunno: :gives: :flipa: :angryfire :1zhelp: :sleep: :sadwavey: :repost: :newburn: :wtf: :twak: :( :eek: :shakehead :screwy: :nono: :frown: :mad: :headshake :confused: :puke: :comprage1 :dupe: :bs: :cya: :bloated: :slap: :eek2: :sleeping: :werd: :sorry: :thumbsdow :swear:
:banghead: :disappoin :uhoh: :eek7: :sly: :chair: :greddy2: :dunno: :gives: :flipa: :angryfire :1zhelp: :sleep: :sadwavey: :repost: :newburn: :wtf: :twak: :( :eek: :shakehead :screwy: :nono: :frown: :mad: :headshake :confused: :puke: :comprage1 :dupe: :bs: :cya: :bloated: :slap: :eek2: :sleeping: :werd: :sorry: :thumbsdow :swear:
KustmAce
06-12-2006, 09:25 PM
I created the comma, water, the letter "e" and the numbers 46-72.
Im gonna be rich!
Im gonna be rich!
Mr Wiggl3s
06-12-2006, 09:35 PM
Hay, its a icon right, someones got to own it..
Toksin
06-12-2006, 09:47 PM
The next person to put up a post full of a billion smileys is going to receive a supreme bitch slapping.
twospirits
06-12-2006, 09:53 PM
The next person to put up a post full of a billion smileys is going to receive a supreme bitch slapping.:lol: Thats right, you tell em.
I'll hold them you slap them.
TS out (getting the tape and rope)
I'll hold them you slap them.
TS out (getting the tape and rope)
2.2 Straight six
06-12-2006, 10:09 PM
The next person to put up a post full of a billion smileys is going to receive a supreme bitch slapping.
oh, there were only 1066 ":)" smileys in that post...
please dont ban/slap me..
oh, there were only 1066 ":)" smileys in that post...
please dont ban/slap me..
Damien
06-12-2006, 10:26 PM
hm...chris. :disappoin
i wonder what a billion would look like???
i wonder what a billion would look like???
2.2 Straight six
06-12-2006, 10:29 PM
hm...chris. :disappoin
i wonder what a billion would look like???
it's 4:30am what am i meant to do?
i wonder what a billion would look like???
it's 4:30am what am i meant to do?
00accord44
06-12-2006, 10:38 PM
It coulda been worse... I coulda put each non-smiley in its own post. But since post-whoring isn't allowed here, I held back.
But if this was the SPF... it woulda been on and poppin!:evillol:
But if this was the SPF... it woulda been on and poppin!:evillol:
Chiquae07
06-12-2006, 11:06 PM
lol....i want them to sue me for using him 'smiley' too much. word? lets say i patent the rubber arm band like erone is wearing now adays. thats the same things thats happening here....
directory
06-13-2006, 06:42 PM
that's stupid...
everyone knows forest gump invented the smiley face while running across the country.
everyone knows forest gump invented the smiley face while running across the country.
00accord44
06-14-2006, 08:39 AM
That and the phrase "shit happens". One of my personal favorites
drunken monkey
06-14-2006, 10:43 AM
what do i get the feeling that if the story was slightly different and that it was some poor old dude in a shed trying to get some money because he can prove that he created the graphic image of the (specific) smiley 60 years ago, the response would be different?
00accord44
06-14-2006, 10:58 AM
Well yeah. but this is just the rich tryna get richer, so i say fuck em. Neither company can say they invented the damn thing so how can they try to control it?
I say "fuck" alot but I'm not tryna get total control over the use of the word... that would be nice though.
Actually I change my mind. I now own the word "fuck"... and the word "the". Every time you use them, I am to be paid $0.25 directly. i accept Paypal and most major credit cards
Have a nice day!:)
I say "fuck" alot but I'm not tryna get total control over the use of the word... that would be nice though.
Actually I change my mind. I now own the word "fuck"... and the word "the". Every time you use them, I am to be paid $0.25 directly. i accept Paypal and most major credit cards
Have a nice day!:)
fredjacksonsan
06-14-2006, 11:03 AM
Actually I change my mind. I now own the word "fuck"... and the word "the". Every time you use them, I am to be paid $0.25 directly. i accept Paypal and most major credit cards
Have a nice day!:)
You'll be able to retire in a couple weeks, just from the proceeds from AF.
(Fawk, that's .23 I owe you!)
Have a nice day!:)
You'll be able to retire in a couple weeks, just from the proceeds from AF.
(Fawk, that's .23 I owe you!)
00accord44
06-14-2006, 11:07 AM
You'll be able to retire in a couple weeks, just from the proceeds from AF.
(Fawk, that's .23 I owe you!)
Thats .25! inflation's a bitch!!!:evillol: :2cents:
(Fawk, that's .23 I owe you!)
Thats .25! inflation's a bitch!!!:evillol: :2cents:
drunken monkey
06-14-2006, 11:07 AM
not the same.
on the one hand, we have here a company that is now trying to get a trademark on the symbol.
on the other, there are people who all claim to have created the symbol.
then there's the guy who owns the rights to the image.
fact is, someone somewhere in time DID create the image.
it doesn't matter how simple the image is or even how often it is used, that person did create it and should be afford some creator rights.
should it be public domain? maybe.
or perhaps it should be an image that shouldn't be allowed to be trademarked as a corporate symbol because of its widespread use already.
on the one hand, we have here a company that is now trying to get a trademark on the symbol.
on the other, there are people who all claim to have created the symbol.
then there's the guy who owns the rights to the image.
fact is, someone somewhere in time DID create the image.
it doesn't matter how simple the image is or even how often it is used, that person did create it and should be afford some creator rights.
should it be public domain? maybe.
or perhaps it should be an image that shouldn't be allowed to be trademarked as a corporate symbol because of its widespread use already.
fredjacksonsan
06-14-2006, 11:13 AM
"Widespread use".....exactly. No one took out a patent on the idea/art originally, and it has been in use for many many years. I say too bad Wal Mart, you chose to use a popular symbol and can't get exclusive rights to it. Too bad old man, if you created it you should have gotten some copyrite protection or something on it years ago...now it's just sad you're trying to get some money out of a business.
:):):) Try getting money from me, beyatch I used a smiley 3x.
Thats .25! inflation's a bitch!!!:evillol: :2cents:
:lol:
:):):) Try getting money from me, beyatch I used a smiley 3x.
Thats .25! inflation's a bitch!!!:evillol: :2cents:
:lol:
00accord44
06-14-2006, 11:13 AM
fact is, someone somewhere in time DID create the image.
it doesn't matter how simple the image is or even how often it is used, that person did create it and should be afford some creator rights.
should it be public domain? maybe.
or perhaps it should be an image that shouldn't be allowed to be trademarked as a corporate symbol because of its widespread use already.
:iagree:
it doesn't matter how simple the image is or even how often it is used, that person did create it and should be afford some creator rights.
should it be public domain? maybe.
or perhaps it should be an image that shouldn't be allowed to be trademarked as a corporate symbol because of its widespread use already.
:iagree:
fredjacksonsan
06-14-2006, 11:15 AM
And what's funny, is the Google ads on this page....several of them are for smiley this and smiley that....no way you can "own" a symbol that's been used for a long time. It'd be like someone laying claim to some religious symbol to try to get money out of a church!
drunken monkey
06-14-2006, 11:38 AM
put it this way, IF i was the creator of a graphic image that has since been used without permission and excessively without consent AND i can prove my intellectual rights to the graphic, I'd sure as hell fight for it. I mean, are we forgetting that someone actually owns the rights to the song "happy birthday"?
i have to say though.... in most normal image rights/graphic creations/intellectual rights cases, the decisions involved are more straight forward.
this one involving the smailey face (are they talking about a specific smiley or all versions of that plain smiley?) is more than messy. I'd hate to be the judge sitting over that.
i have to say though.... in most normal image rights/graphic creations/intellectual rights cases, the decisions involved are more straight forward.
this one involving the smailey face (are they talking about a specific smiley or all versions of that plain smiley?) is more than messy. I'd hate to be the judge sitting over that.
quteasabutton
06-14-2006, 12:04 PM
if they somehow manage to gain rights to a smiley face, i think i'm going to start using it more. just to be a rebel :)
imagine the court case if they ever bust someone for it "ah yes you're here for illegal use of a smiling face...":rolleyes:
imagine the court case if they ever bust someone for it "ah yes you're here for illegal use of a smiling face...":rolleyes:
00accord44
06-14-2006, 12:11 PM
"ah yes you're here for illegal use of a smiling face...":rolleyes:
I'va also decided to patent the smile. Not the smiley face, the smile itself.:nono:
You turn that frown upside down and turn those pockets inside out! I want my damn money every time you show those pearly whites :grinyes: = :2cents:
I'va also decided to patent the smile. Not the smiley face, the smile itself.:nono:
You turn that frown upside down and turn those pockets inside out! I want my damn money every time you show those pearly whites :grinyes: = :2cents:
fredjacksonsan
06-14-2006, 12:42 PM
I'va also decided to patent the smile. Not the smiley face, the smile itself.:nono:
You turn that frown upside down and turn those pockets inside out! I want my damn money every time you show those pearly whites :grinyes: = :2cents:
Sorry, you'll have to fight Mr. Rourke (from "Fantasy Island") a.k.a. Ricardo Montalban for that.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/14/Fantasy_Island.jpg "Smiles, everyone, smiles!"
You turn that frown upside down and turn those pockets inside out! I want my damn money every time you show those pearly whites :grinyes: = :2cents:
Sorry, you'll have to fight Mr. Rourke (from "Fantasy Island") a.k.a. Ricardo Montalban for that.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/14/Fantasy_Island.jpg "Smiles, everyone, smiles!"
drunken monkey
06-14-2006, 12:46 PM
you're missing the point.
that initial image was drawn up by someone, somewhere in time.
it isn't anything about ANY smiley face (which it can be argued that might not even exist were it not for that original inception) or parts thereof (which again, falls under the same points in the previous bracketed clause).
Someone created the graphic image (note my use of this term to describe it) and someone does hold intellectual rights to it.
by the way, a patent is something else entirely.
AND, the point isn't about the legality of the use of a smiley face, it is whether or not your use falls under such that requires you to pay a fee for.
It's pretty much the same with music.
no one has to pay a dime to sing happy birthday but change the environment and use of the song and some is liable for fees.
then again, whether or not the owners enforce the rights is something else.
that initial image was drawn up by someone, somewhere in time.
it isn't anything about ANY smiley face (which it can be argued that might not even exist were it not for that original inception) or parts thereof (which again, falls under the same points in the previous bracketed clause).
Someone created the graphic image (note my use of this term to describe it) and someone does hold intellectual rights to it.
by the way, a patent is something else entirely.
AND, the point isn't about the legality of the use of a smiley face, it is whether or not your use falls under such that requires you to pay a fee for.
It's pretty much the same with music.
no one has to pay a dime to sing happy birthday but change the environment and use of the song and some is liable for fees.
then again, whether or not the owners enforce the rights is something else.
thecackster
06-14-2006, 02:51 PM
is it just the yellow smiley face or all of them?
Damien
06-14-2006, 02:55 PM
this is why it's so stupid! why not agree that no one has any rights to it what-so-ever!
thecackster
06-14-2006, 02:58 PM
this is why it's so stupid! why not agree that no one has any rights to it what-so-ever!
Becuase someone wants the $$ for it....someone always wants the money for it...it's a freakn' smiley face...damn
Becuase someone wants the $$ for it....someone always wants the money for it...it's a freakn' smiley face...damn
Igovert500
06-14-2006, 05:49 PM
And here I thought this thread would be about Walmart screwing over it's employees, or selling their corporate souls to the devil in exchange for world domination....you know...the normal stuff......
http://z.about.com/d/pittsburgh/1/0/J/9/mr_yuk.jpg
fuck walmart is right.
http://z.about.com/d/pittsburgh/1/0/J/9/mr_yuk.jpg
fuck walmart is right.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026