Subject: RE: Ignore this From: katlaughing Date: 22 Jun 99 - 05:38 PM After researching, many years ago, info from the US office of Trademarks, or some such offical sounding entity, we interpreted that it was okay to put TM beside a slogan we used for my brother's music. So far, nobody has come after us nor prosecuted us! Back to the html: here's a really cool site wherein one may click on a background colour and see a representation of same: kool colours & other HTML stuff |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Bill D Date: 22 Jun 99 - 04:29 PM ooohhh..scary!! *grin*...maybe I'd better be Bill DØ (it's probably illegal to claim to be 'nothing' in interstate commerce) |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Richard Bridge Date: 22 Jun 99 - 04:05 PM One of them (and I think it's "TM", but I'd check if I were advising a paying client) imports reference both to registered and unregistered trade marks. So if in your jurisdiction your name has acquired the necessary trade meaning under tha law of that jurisdiction, TM should be OK. The R symbol implies registration, I think. And its not a case of suing, it's a case of being prosecuted (if anyone bothers)! |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Jun 99 - 02:56 PM Thanks, Richard. I was going to ask about the difference between TM and ® - sounds like there isn't a whole lot of difference. The two music acts I've seen with trademark symbols after their names are Billy Joel and Chicago. It really surprised me that Chicago could claim a trademark, and I think it's kind of tacky for anyone to trademark a name of a person. Well, I think my name is every bit as distinctive and interesting as those, so I remain -Joe Offer®- So sue me.... |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Richard Bridge Date: 22 Jun 99 - 01:57 PM While we are on the subject, in most countries it is an offence (not merely offensive) to represent that matter is a registered trade mark if such representation is not true. Depending on the jurisdiction, this may apply to use of the "R in a circle" and/or "TM" logos. Secondly, it is true that you do "trade mark" matter, for it is a precondition to the acquisition of a registered trade mark that the mark has been applied for. But it is generally not true that you have "copyrighted" matter, for in most jurisdictions copyright arises by operation of law from the creation of a work which is the fit subject for copyright, and registration is not a precondition to the existence of the the right. This is even true in the USA these days (now that the USA is catching up with more civilised copyright jurisdictions (BG)! Thirdly, US trade mark law is very different from UK trade mark law (as Elvis Presley Enterprises expensively found out). |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Bill D Date: 22 Jun 99 - 01:03 PM in response to Mark wayyyyy ^ up there...I was Bill D™...not Bill D® or Bill D©...and in another chat place once, I was ßI££ Ð.... (and now I'm just waiting till they figure out how to make the font I choose to appear on YOUR screens!)...I have been collecting neat fonts for 2 years, and though I can read Mudcat in Baskerville or Kelmscott if I wish, I can't share it with YOU easily...bet someone is already working on it... |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: SueH Date: 22 Jun 99 - 11:05 AM I think this is the universal thread response, had to do it, but....
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: catspaw49 Date: 22 Jun 99 - 08:45 AM Well Banj, I'm with you!!! I got all this stuff down here in print for posterity sake and now if I had had any inkling of what the f*** any of it means, I could truly say, "Oh yeah, sure," and mean it! catspaw |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Wally Macnow Date: 22 Jun 99 - 06:59 AM Sheesh! And all I was trying to do was get the "" link coding right. Please don't throw me in that briar patch. Wally |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Banjer Date: 22 Jun 99 - 04:53 AM Thanks, Alan, but what the hell is it we know now? Boy this is getting real technical real fast. |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Alan of Australia Date: 22 Jun 99 - 04:46 AM G'day, Another lesson in case anyone's wondering why we bother to use hexadecimal at all: Although hexadecimal is a numbering system in its own right, it can be used very conveniently as a shorthand method of writing binary numbers which is the only system that your CPU knows. Each hex digit translates directly to 4 bi(nary digi)ts or bits.
Hex bin
so 9AF5 = 1001 1010 1111 0101 Just thought you needed to know.........
Cheers, |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: alison Date: 22 Jun 99 - 03:56 AM sorry Seed... I didn't meant to get stuck in your computer..... now can someone else fix it for him? slainte alison |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: MudGuard Date: 22 Jun 99 - 02:19 AM Please put on your socks and shoes again before I suffocate!!! Andreas |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Jun 99 - 02:18 AM Now, class, if you have trouble with the wonderful lecture Andreas just presented, take off your shoes and socks - and don't count on your thumbs or big toes. -Joe Offer- |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: MudGuard Date: 22 Jun 99 - 02:13 AM Penny S., about the color codes (the numeric ones): they contain three numbers of two hexadecimal (see below)digits each. The first is the red, the second the green, the third the blue part of the color (also called an RGB value). The higher the number for a color part, the brighter is the color. 000000 means none of the colors is present, resulting in black. ffffff means all colors in full brightness = white. ff0000 is a bright red, 008000 is a dark green, 0000c0 is a medium blue, ffff00 is bright yellow, ff8000 is orange and so on, you just mix red, blue and green (results may vary slightly from screen to screen).
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: bseed(charleskratz) Date: 22 Jun 99 - 01:56 AM I think all you show-offs have given me a virus: I've got a thin strip of "a go slainte alison stuck across the top of the page and a few scattered letters hiding behind the windowframe at the bottom (they are blue). Bad things can happen when people get powers they can't control: {:> (:>)-) ) --seed (I suppose we've gotta put up with this gunk in all the threads from now on)(why couldn't I--for once-- ignore an "ignore this"?) |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: catspaw49 Date: 22 Jun 99 - 01:16 AM Uh, yeah............Peter T. and I were having a bit of discussion the other day about wasted time, intellect, space, bandwidth, etc. I got to thinking about it more and more and began to feel my life had turned compleyely to shit. Thanks guys, I knew you'd come through......I feel much better now. catspaw |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Mark Roffe Date: 22 Jun 99 - 01:04 AM We're COPYRIGHTED, not TRADEMARKED. (Please don't trade me). Mark |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Mark Roffe Date: 22 Jun 99 - 01:02 AM
|
Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Jun 99 - 12:08 AM Nope, Alison, you're safe. Unsing embedded photos and sounds from other sites slowed things down because browsers have to get the information from all the sites involved - a thread with thirty pictures could have to download from as many as 30 sites, plus Mudcat. HTML comes straight through, direct from the 'Cat to you. the excessive use of HTML in threads does tend to make the threads hard to read - but in goofoff threads like this one, who cares? Have fun, O fair one. -Joe Offer®- Hey, do ALL of you have trademarked names like mine???? |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Margo Date: 22 Jun 99 - 12:07 AM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: alison Date: 21 Jun 99 - 11:38 PM Hahahahaha... OK I'll stop now..... but seriously.. remember when Max didn't want us to use pictures because it slowed everything down.... does html work the same way? (I know.. computer thicky.. I admit it) slainte alison |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: alison Date: 21 Jun 99 - 11:31 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: alison Date: 21 Jun 99 - 11:25 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Alan of Australia Date: 21 Jun 99 - 11:23 PM G'day, Well I've only got an old version of Netscape here at work so I can't see all the effects here. I'll have to wait till I get home to ignore this thread.
Cheers, |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jun 99 - 11:05 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: alison Date: 21 Jun 99 - 11:04 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: gargoyle Date: 21 Jun 99 - 10:55 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Jeri Date: 21 Jun 99 - 10:40 PM
Sandy seemed to imply I had too much time on my hands. Sandy is a wise man. |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: katlaughing Date: 21 Jun 99 - 09:52 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Dave Swan Date: 21 Jun 99 - 09:51 PM I've tried and tried to make this work. Can anyone tell me how to get Crayola marks off of my monitor? |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jun 99 - 08:39 PM -Joe Offer- |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Jeri Date: 21 Jun 99 - 08:36 PM You type in: <marquee>then type the text you want to scroll </marquee> |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jun 99 - 08:35 PM The moving sign uses the <marquee> command, Margarita. If you find an HTML trick you want to imitate, right-click on the page you like and choose "view source." Then steal whatever you like from the information that appears on your screen. You can cut-and-pase the major stuff, and insert your own changes. Instead of the number codes for colors, you can use the words posted in the chart Bill linked to. The code for my banner message is below. -Joe Offer- <P><div align="center"><center> <P> <table border="2" width=100% bgcolor="hotpink" bordercolor="#008080" bordercolordark="#008000" bordercolorlight="#00FF00"> <tr> <td><font color="white" size="7"><marquee scrollamount="5" scrolldelay="1">OK, Jeri, I'm impressed....but I learn quick. -Joe Offer<small>®</small>-</marquee></font></td> </tr> </table> </center></div> <P> |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Margo Date: 21 Jun 99 - 08:20 PM Yeah, but what about the moving sign? |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Bill D Date: 21 Jun 99 - 07:58 PM here is a page showing the colors and their codes...color codes |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jun 99 - 07:13 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Penny S. Date: 21 Jun 99 - 07:12 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Bill D Date: 21 Jun 99 - 06:55 PM all I did was go to 'view source' and blatantly copy the right lines and then substitute a few words...(ya gotta be careful though |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Penny S. Date: 21 Jun 99 - 06:36 PM I've just been reading the source stuff, and I still don't know! |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Sandy Paton Date: 21 Jun 99 - 06:36 PM I knew that Jeri was going to be a great asset to this community. It's good to know we have a gal who's ready to put you HTML show-offs in your places. Alison could probably do it, too, I realize, and Alice, and Barbara, etc., but Jeri has more time, now that she's retired. See you at Old Songs, Compu-whiz! Sandy, famous Cyber-klutz |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Matthew B. Date: 21 Jun 99 - 06:36 PM Alright, that does it. I want to know how you did each one of those!!!! |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Bill D Date: 21 Jun 99 - 06:31 PM they may also disregard my spelling... |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Bill D Date: 21 Jun 99 - 06:30 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Jeri Date: 21 Jun 99 - 06:27 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Banjer Date: 21 Jun 99 - 05:58 PM This is neat, yestuddy i cudnt evan spel html and hear i are doin' it! I'm glad I ignored this like I was told! |
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Banjer Date: 21 Jun 99 - 05:55 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Bill D Date: 21 Jun 99 - 05:54 PM very good Joe!...I gotta practice that...there are places where I need the attention...*grin*
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jun 99 - 05:38 PM
|
Subject: RE: Ignore this From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jun 99 - 05:18 PM
|
Share Thread: |