Lik

I just don't see how this Raymond fella would have much of a case at all. First of all, he was using some super generic names to begin with. Secondly, even his own side admitted to not trademarking these super generic name initially. Based on these 2 facts alone, what grounds does he have to sue?

If Raymond can prove that Paul has stolen or otherwise directly copied his vendor application forms, venue site map, and website photographs, he might win some small consolation prize for these things. Then again, it doesn't seem all that hard for Paul to counter the allegations. After all, I don't see how you can claim intellectual property rights on sales booth arrangement when all it amounted to was a few straight aisles running down the venue. And Paul would have to be pretty stupid to totally plagiarize Raymond's stuff for his own use. (Certainly, Paul must have learned the rules of plagiarism when he was in college / university?)

There is no doubt that the Richmond night market has been a most successful summer event for everyone in the city. To have Raymond putting a court injunction on it to prevent it from being hosted this year seems like he is purely doing this out of selfishness and a bad case of sour grades, and that leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

-Lik

Lik

i think it will be quite hard for him to claim that there was "passing off". it was quite clear to reasonable people that it was not the same night market(it was mentioned in numerous news articles and it was never represented to be the same event). Raymond's lawyer of course will say there is a case, otherwise he would have immediately asked the court for an "Interlocutory Injunction" (injunction before the trial) right away la. But of course, if he did ask for the Interlocutory Injunction and lost the case, he will have to pay the loss to the victim.
The fact of not asking for an injunction in the first place shows this is merely a threat, no basis at all.
simon 發表於 2009-4-28 21:20

Thank you for the insight, esp about the point on interlocutory injunction.

It really makes me wonder though -- what was Raymond thinking when he filed for the lawsuit? I quite agree with Simon's opinion that he probably wanted to use the lawsuit as something to "threaten" the other party or possibly using it as his bargaining chip to negotiate for something. However, given that his case was weak to begin with, why proceed with a lawsuit like that? It's almost like he bluffed at the poker table, but the other party called and raised him back. And now he is stuck with what he got himself into...

-Lik