LAW AND JUSTICE SURVEY; DO WA DIDDY DADDY ...


Law and Justice survey

The IPKat's fellow blogger Edwin Jacobs is seeking the views of readers of Law & Justice, a broad-ranging weblog with a subject-matter that includes IP issues. Happy birthday, says the IPKat. To complete the survey, follow the link to it from Edwin's first birthday announcement here.


Do-Wa Diddy Daddy Puff Diddy Do

The IPKat has received news both from the BBC and from his friend the eagle-eyed Alexander Tsoutsanis that rap superstar Sean Combs (left), sometimes known as Diddy and otherwise as P Diddy, Puff Daddy or Puffy, to pay Richard Dearlove in excess of £110,000 as part of an out-of-court settlement over the right to be known as Diddy. Combs has also agreed not to style himself as Diddy in the UK - although it will be difficult, if not downright impossible, to stop others calling him that.

The Genuine British Diddy is London-based music producer Richard Dearlove, who has been Diddy since 1992. Dearlove sued for passing off after learning that the rapper had dropped the P from his name and had decided to relaunch himself solely as Diddy. It is reported that Combs will have to embark on a costly rebrand of his commercial activities in the UK.

The IPKat has some doubt as to whether the passing off action would have succeeded: it is difficult to imagine the rapper trying to pass himself off as Richard Dearlove in order to cash in on the latter's goodwill. He also suspects that Richard Dearlove had to change his name to Diddy in order to avoid being mistaken for the Head of MI6, the original Richard Dearlove (right). Merpel humbly suggests, at no extra cost, the following new names for Combs: D Piffy, Duff Paddy, Puff Daffy ...

Puff Adder here
Do-Wah Diddy Diddy here
LAW AND JUSTICE SURVEY; DO WA DIDDY DADDY ... LAW AND JUSTICE SURVEY; DO WA DIDDY DADDY ... Reviewed by Jeremy on Sunday, September 10, 2006 Rating: 5

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

Powered by Blogger.