| |
Main
Date: 12 Mar 2007 21:37:24
From: Matt O'Toole
Subject: "Same roads, same rules, same rights"
|
"Same roads, same rules, same rights"...
Is this copyrighted or tradeked? If so, by whom? Or are we free to
use it anyway?
I've seen it written with "rules" and "rights" switched, but the other way
makes more sense, and is better copywriting.
Matt O.
|
|
| |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 10:06:45
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: "Same roads, same rules, same rights"
|
Matt O'Toole wrote:
:: "Same roads, same rules, same rights"...
::
:: Is this copyrighted or tradeked? If so, by whom? Or are we free
:: to use it anyway?
::
:: I've seen it written with "rules" and "rights" switched, but the
:: other way makes more sense, and is better copywriting.
::
:: Matt O.
Try here: http://www.uspto.gov/main/tradeks.htm
|
| |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 01:46:28
From:
Subject: Re: "Same roads, same rules, same rights"
|
On Mon, 12 2007 21:37:24 -0400, Matt O'Toole
<mattotoole@letterboxes.org > wrote:
>"Same roads, same rules, same rights"...
>
>Is this copyrighted or tradeked? If so, by whom? Or are we free to
>use it anyway?
>
>I've seen it written with "rules" and "rights" switched, but the other way
>makes more sense, and is better copywriting.
>
>Matt O.
If you are referring to the ever-present motor-car/cycle debate, "same
rights" is wrong; as cyclists (in most parts of the world) use the
road by right, whereas motorists use it by permission.
And of course, "same rules" is frequently wrong as well.
|
| | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 01:08:06
From: Matt O'Toole
Subject: Re: "Same roads, same rules, same rights"
|
On Tue, 13 2007 01:46:28 +0000, jtaylor wrote:
> On Mon, 12 2007 21:37:24 -0400, Matt O'Toole
> <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote:
>
>>"Same roads, same rules, same rights"...
>>
>>Is this copyrighted or tradeked? If so, by whom? Or are we free to
>>use it anyway?
>>
>>I've seen it written with "rules" and "rights" switched, but the other way
>>makes more sense, and is better copywriting.
>>
>>Matt O.
>
> If you are referring to the ever-present motor-car/cycle debate, "same
> rights" is wrong; as cyclists (in most parts of the world) use the
> road by right, whereas motorists use it by permission.
>
> And of course, "same rules" is frequently wrong as well.
I'm not referring to any debate. I asked a direct question about
copyright or tradek, on either version of this phrase. Does anyone
have an answer?
Matt O.
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 09:57:04
From: Wayne Pein
Subject: Re: "Same roads, same rules, same rights"
|
Matt O'Toole wrote:
> On Tue, 13 2007 01:46:28 +0000, jtaylor wrote:
>
>
>>On Mon, 12 2007 21:37:24 -0400, Matt O'Toole
>><mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Same roads, same rules, same rights"...
>>>
>>>Is this copyrighted or tradeked? If so, by whom? Or are we free to
>>>use it anyway?
>>>
Georgia Bicycle Federation.
http://probicycle.com/
Wayne
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Mar 2007 11:23:19
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: "Same roads, same rules, same rights"
|
Wayne Pein wrote:
> Georgia Bicycle Federation.
>
> http://probicycle.com/
Interesting group. Quote:
Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every road, just
as do all other users. Nothing more is expected. Nothing less is acceptable.
--
David L. Johnson
"Business!" cried the Ghost. "Mankind was my business. The common
welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and
benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but
a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!" --Dickens,
|
|
