Thanks to all those who took part in the Teazer's teaser. The voting indicates that there was quite some debate over the issues despite the fact that it was not possible to vote with complete confidence because nobody had sight of the registered trade mark. If anyone knows what Lolly actually did then please let this blog know.
Right: A Teazer's Poll
In the meantime, it is interesting to consider what the implications would be if RSA legislation adopted an "unjustified threats" provision in their trade mark legislation making it possible for law firms and claimants/plaintiffs to be sued for unjustified threats in cases where the infringement is overstated. The Teazer's teaser illustrates just how careful one would have to be in describing the infringement and how easy it may be for a character like Lolly to counter-claim for an unjustified threat, even if it was justified (instead Lolly used the press, and quite successfully too). Litigation tactics would certainly change as would those detested (but effective) standard letters of demand.
Natasha Rey's comment on whether the controversial "Laugh it off" case would have been decided differently had it involved an expression KYKNET! with the sexual overtones of the Teazer's example is something to ponder. Perhaps you have a view?
