The IPKat raised a furore last week when he told Ilanah’s favourite joke (“Do Trade Marks Get Up Your Nose?”, 8 December). In an urgent attempt to make amends by telling a joke in somewhat better taste, he is pleased to bring you a tale which masquerades as a true story (sub nom. “Actual Australian Court Docket 12659: the Case of the Pregnant Lady”). The story, which has actually been doing the rounds on the internet for some time, goes as follows:
A lady about 8 months pregnant got on a bus. She noticed the man opposite her was smiling at her. She immediately moved to another seat. This time the smile turned into a grin, so she moved again. The man seemed more amused. When, on the fourth move, the man burst out laughing, she complained to the driver and he had the man arrested.
The case came up in court. The judge asked the man (about 20 years old) what he had to say for himself. The man replied, "Well your Honour, it was like this: When the lady got on the bus, I couldn't help but notice her condition. She sat under a sweet sign that said: "The Double-Mint Twins are Coming" and I grinned. Then she moved and sat under a sign that said, "Logan's Liniment will reduce the swelling" and I had to smile. Then she placed herself under a deodorant sign that said, "William's Big Stick Did the Trick", and I could hardly contain myself. BUT, your Honour, when she moved the fourth time and sat under a sign that said, "Goodyear Rubber could have prevented this Accident", I just lost it". Case dismissed.
The IPKat is impressed at the role played by brand advertising in this joke. Doubtless the killjoys in the European Court of Justice will consider that the inclusion of a registered trade mark in the script of a joke interferes with its "essential function" and thus constitutes an infringing act.
Travel during pregnancy here
Get your rubbers here
Make your own liniment and deodorant here
Twin gum wads here
Transport tune here
A lady about 8 months pregnant got on a bus. She noticed the man opposite her was smiling at her. She immediately moved to another seat. This time the smile turned into a grin, so she moved again. The man seemed more amused. When, on the fourth move, the man burst out laughing, she complained to the driver and he had the man arrested.
The case came up in court. The judge asked the man (about 20 years old) what he had to say for himself. The man replied, "Well your Honour, it was like this: When the lady got on the bus, I couldn't help but notice her condition. She sat under a sweet sign that said: "The Double-Mint Twins are Coming" and I grinned. Then she moved and sat under a sign that said, "Logan's Liniment will reduce the swelling" and I had to smile. Then she placed herself under a deodorant sign that said, "William's Big Stick Did the Trick", and I could hardly contain myself. BUT, your Honour, when she moved the fourth time and sat under a sign that said, "Goodyear Rubber could have prevented this Accident", I just lost it". Case dismissed.
The IPKat is impressed at the role played by brand advertising in this joke. Doubtless the killjoys in the European Court of Justice will consider that the inclusion of a registered trade mark in the script of a joke interferes with its "essential function" and thus constitutes an infringing act.
Travel during pregnancy here
Get your rubbers here
Make your own liniment and deodorant here
Twin gum wads here
Transport tune here
NEITHER SNOT NOR SPINACH
Reviewed by Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo
on
Monday, December 15, 2003
Rating:
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html