Re: Transactions: good or bad?

> And even product placement is not a sure thing, they objected to product
> placement in a little song called Lola. Perhaps, you have heard the song?
> Nobody sips Coca Cola in it; they sip "Cherry Cola" instead. The lyrics were
> changed due to trademark issues.

Actually, no, they play song a lot on Philadelphia Radio, and they call it Coca Cola. 1st Amendment? Also, if that were the case, then, could not Steven King have been sued for Christine? Was that not a Plymouth? Or how about Bob Dylan's From a Buick Six, or

>
> I assume the song's subject matter did not meet the wholesomeness
> requirements of KO's marketing plan; although, I am sure many people found
> the song refreshing when it first came out.

It's a great song by a great band, and I could hardly see how Coke would fit that into any sane Marketing plan. Can hear the screech of the boardroom now: "but they would think Coke is for transvestites" Or something ludicrous.

>
> "Zipper" lost its trademark status because the original trademark owner made
> careless use of the indefinite article in its advertising. Coke has never
> fallen into the same trap. They have spent a lot of money developing their
> brand, and they protect their investment in all of their trademarks.

That's interesting. I think that there is some overlap between fair use and trademark status. Like, I can't make a soda called Coke, but I can certainly have a video game where someone smashes people with Coke bottles. Received on Thu Jun 19 2003 - 06:46:25 CEST