[Newsbot]

Title: Cash crunch hangs over Liberal party
Category: Political
Posted By: ridenrain
Date: 2008-07-09 06:11:12
Canadian

[robmik43]

Maybe some of the Libs on this board should send
their buddies a few extra dollars.
I send the Conservatives a few bucks...and we don't get
sued quite as much as the Libs, so we'll have
enough dough to actually fight the next election.

[mtbr]

Looks like they'll have to dig even deeper

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080709/wl_ ... hift_col_2

An environmental consulting firm sued Canada's opposition Liberal Party on Wednesday for C$8.7 million ($8.6 million) for using the company's Green Shift trademark as a slogan for its carbon-tax plan.

[DerbyX]

I don't know how far they'll get.

$1:

Spokesman Dan Lauzon said the party simply used a common phrase in the environmental movement, and is not using the brand to sell any products or compete with Wright.

"It's the green shift," Lauzon told The Canadian Press.

"We're taking taxes out of one part of the economy and moving them to another part of the economy. Those words are used widely to describe bold environmental movements."

Wright acknowledged that at least one other company, Greenshift Corp., of the United States, also uses the phrase. She said she attempted legally to stop them but dropped her efforts because of the expense and location of the company.

Wright also has acknowledged the British government last year used the term Green Shift for the name of a task force investigation of carbon-dioxide emissions.

Its a common phrase. Recall when Donald Trump tried to trademark the phrase "your fired". That failed for very understandable reasons.

[ridenrain]

The fact that they knew the name was taken and warned the company that they should expect some extra traffic proves that they expected a conflict. They were asked and warned not to use the name and they still went ahead with it.
Did they just think they were entitled to that name?

Derby: You couldn't just state the obvious, that someone screwed up and didn't check the name? This sort of thing happens with all sorts of groups and you would have looked less like a hack if you simply said that it looks bad. Instead you toe the party line and try and prove that "green shift" is somehow a common phrase and is free for everyone to use.

No comment on the Libs borrowing $2 million?

[Regina]

Maybe Galliano has an envelope or two he hasn't opened yet.

[CanAm1]

Well at least they aren't stealing it from the Boys and Girls Clubs of America like the Air America Radio network executive did.
Nice to see the Libs struggling for dough. Puts a smile on my face.

[DerbyX]

ridenrain ridenrain:

The fact that they knew the name was taken and warned the company that they should expect some extra traffic proves that they expected a conflict. They were asked and warned not to use the name and they still went ahead with it.
Did they just think they were entitled to that name?

Derby: You couldn't just state the obvious, that someone screwed up and didn't check the name? This sort of thing happens with all sorts of groups and you would have looked less like a hack if you simply said that it looks bad. Instead you toe the party line and try and prove that "green shift" is somehow a common phrase and is free for everyone to use.

No comment on the Libs borrowing $2 million?

Ignoring the obvious that perhaps they did check and felt "Thegreenshiftplan" wasn't legally the same as greenshift.

They dropped their lawsuit against the US company and that alone may sink their lawsuit. They didn't stop the UK usage of the exact phrasing either.

Should the Liberals have used something like "shifttogreen" instead? Yes. DOes that mean they are legally infringing on a copyright? A very fine legal question.

Mike Rowe got sued by Microsoft because he set up mikerowesoft, his own name and only phonetically the same as microsoft. He was fighting it for awhile then settled out of court for some new computer equipment and a small bit of cash if I recall.

Was he in infrigement? Was Trump legally allowed to copywrite "you're fired"?

What is their basis for copywriting greenshift, a common usage phrase that predates their company.

Can I just copyright redshift then sue any science journal for using it and not acknowledging my copywrite?

The Libs weren't smart but legally they have a case.

[Pseudonym]

Money is such a sordid subject. They should just reroute their donations to me. I'll run a decent campaign for 'em.

[ridenrain]

DerbyX DerbyX:

ridenrain ridenrain:

The fact that they knew the name was taken and warned the company that they should expect some extra traffic proves that they expected a conflict. They were asked and warned not to use the name and they still went ahead with it.
Did they just think they were entitled to that name?

Derby: You couldn't just state the obvious, that someone screwed up and didn't check the name? This sort of thing happens with all sorts of groups and you would have looked less like a hack if you simply said that it looks bad. Instead you toe the party line and try and prove that "green shift" is somehow a common phrase and is free for everyone to use.

No comment on the Libs borrowing $2 million?

Ignoring the obvious that perhaps they did check and felt "Thegreenshiftplan" wasn't legally the same as greenshift.

They dropped their lawsuit against the US company and that alone may sink their lawsuit. They didn't stop the UK usage of the exact phrasing either.

Should the Liberals have used something like "shifttogreen" instead? Yes. DOes that mean they are legally infringing on a copyright? A very fine legal question.

Mike Rowe got sued by Microsoft because he set up mikerowesoft, his own name and only phonetically the same as microsoft. He was fighting it for awhile then settled out of court for some new computer equipment and a small bit of cash if I recall.

Was he in infrigement? Was Trump legally allowed to copywrite "you're fired"?

What is their basis for copywriting greenshift, a common usage phrase that predates their company.

Can I just copyright redshift then sue any science journal for using it and not acknowledging my copywrite?

The Libs weren't smart but legally they have a case.

That's fair. With enough money and the right lawyers, there's always a chance you can prove black is white and day is night. We'll have to leave this up to the courts.

[Freakinoldguy]

This is a tempest in a tea cup. The real trial for the Liberals will be when they go to court to defend themselves against the charges the Conservative Party leveled against them.

If Stephie loses this copyright case all he has to do is remove the fourth letter from the last word in the slogan and he should be alright.

[DerbyX]

ridenrain ridenrain:

That's fair. With enough money and the right lawyers, there's always a chance you can prove black is white and day is night. We'll have to leave this up to the courts.

What about the Liberals suing them for their share of increased revenue due to all the publicity they are getting?

Aside from your bias against the Liberals you might have been asking about how they can trademark a common phrase or how they can balk at names that are close but not exact.

Trademark infringement is a whole twisted sordid legal landmine.

http://www.greenshift.com (US corporation)
http://www.thegreenshift.ca (Liberal site)

Which one is the trademark infrigement?

How about:
http://www.greenshiftmusic.com
Greenshift - Firefox addon

http://www.greenshift.ca

From their own webpage:

$1:

Green Shift is as much a concept as it is a company. We are a Federal Incorporate of Canada and operate as a For Profit Organization because we believe that a Sustainable future rests not on hand outs from generous souls but on Profit with Principles. We set out to be a Model for what initially began as a plea to others.

Can concepts be trademarked? Isn't that very concept the whole Liberal strategy?

Since none of us are trademark lawyers we can't argue the merits of the case.

If this were the CPC your opinion would be the exact opposite. I hope my opinion wouldn't be but in all honesty if it were the CPC doing it I probably would.

[Thanos]

Regina Regina:

Maybe Galliano has an envelope or two he hasn't opened yet.

Probably not. Knowing Gagliano's connections it probably all went to Sopranos-sort of people who aren't exactly well known for giving the money back. Knowing the Libs they're more likely to go to one of their hand-picked judges who'll suddenly decide that it's a constitutional "obligation" of the taxpayers to financially prop up certain federal political parties that are in peril.

[ridenrain]

Actually, the Greenshift lawsuit is another thread. This was to draw attention to the state of Liberal finances summed up in this one paragraph:

$1:

The financial statements also show a $2-million loan with an extremely punishing 9% interest rate, collateralized against the assets not only of the party but of a number of riding associations. This is highly unusual and indicates a degree of financial stress long suspected but never admitted by the party.

That $2 million loan didn't get into the usual media and with 4 by-elections comming up soon (first week of September - two in Quebec and two in Ontario) the state of finances could be a huge point with voters.
The CPC is always slagged as being the party of big businesss but since Chretien's changes to company donations, the Libs have been unable to raise money when the CPC is still going strong. That tells me that they the Libs were far more dependant on Bay Street tnan the CPC are.

Fighting by-elections, campaigning for an election and fighting 2 lawsuits is definately going to be difficult if the party needs to borrow the money to do it.

[Zipperfish]

Unless the person suing can be tied to the CPC. That might turn a weakness into a strength.