Talk:Rocky Mountain Fur Con/Archive 1
Delete the link to rockymountainfurcon.com ? (that URL results in "This domain name expired on 04/03/06 and is pending renewal or deletion". --EarthFurst 08:19, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
It's only been a week since then. Perhaps someone who knows the con's staff could alert them? I'd say, give it until the expiry notice turns into a placeholder or a squatterhouse before delinking (that's more likely than the name simply vanishing, now that it's been registered). -- Siege 13:41, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Status of con and website?
The domain has in fact turned into a squatterhouse.
Also, I'm not sure the statement "When the Mid-America Anthropomorphics and Arts Corporation ceased to exist, a new group was formed to re-start RMFC under the banner of Rocky Mountain Arts and Entertainment, Inc." is correct. If you look at the bottom of their front page, it says that MAAAC is in charge of the -current- con. I'd correct it, but I don't know anything about the previous entity's name to be 100%. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs) .
- I've updated the article to note the discrepancy. There's been some very minor changes to the site, such as the date, so I don't think it's completely a squatterhouse yet. If anyone can elaborate on RFMC's situation, please be our guest! --Frizzy 20:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Umm, someone might want to point out to these folks that "Furcon" (and by extension "Fur Con") is a registered trademark of Anthropomorphic Arts and Education, Inc. (Registration #2893578, July 20, 2004). ----DuncanDaHusky(talk) 15:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- That might be an inappropriate extension. Compound marks are treated specially in trademark law, and a compound may be registrable even if the separate words are not. If "fur con" is a generic term for furry conventions (if someone says "fur con", do you really think of Further Confusion?), then it may not be possible to enforce it in that manner, and it might be subject to cancellation in the future. Even the five-year incontestability rule will not help it if a mark is "the generic name for the goods or services or a portion thereof, for which it is registered." (15 U.S.C. §1065 4).
- All that said, apparently RMFC did a licensing deal. I suspect they also got in contact with Texas Fur Con at some point. I did find it rather amusing that they filed for the trademark just after CSI (and perhaps that was the reason). --GreenReaper(talk) 23:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have documented approximately 2 dozen uses of the word "fur con" in a generic context. --Douglas Muth 19:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
merge dealer list?
Merge the 2008 dealer list into dealer list in "Rocky Mountain Fur Con 2008" article? --EarthFurst 02:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)