+1 for tacky (or goofy). United doesn't need to print the symbols unless they're party to some agreement that says so. So long as the copyright holders are ringing up sales, I'd estimate there's about a 0% litigation risk to United if they omit the symbols.
Yeah - there's no requirement as they're not trying to pass off their own brand as "Jack Daniel's". But undoubtedly as a courtesy to companies with whom they have contracts plus their own desire not to have the United trademark misused, they do it. Note that it's not for all the trademarked liquors. I agree both that this is annoying but a very minor one.
Originally Posted by mahasamatman
Anything published in Japan does not need to follow U.S. copyright rules, just as anything published in the U.S. does not need to follow Japanese copyright rules. (This assumes the documents in question aren't intended for sale in the other country.)
Not true. A japanese company can't defend trademark infringement by saying "we printed the materials in Japan for use in the U.S." While ANA wouldn't need to comply with US trademark rules for its domestic flights, it would for those operating in the U.S. - assuming the law actually requires them to do what United is doing.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Feb 22, 2018 at 11:10 am
Reason: merging consecutive posts by same member
Feb 22, 2018, 8:39 am
