Actually Prince Philip of Spain, was also King of England for about 4 years from 1554 to 1558 as a result of his marriage to Queen Mary I. He involved England in Spain’s war against France. As a result Mary lost the last English possession in France - Calais. So the answer Prince Philip of Spain was half right (although technically at the time Calais was lost Philip had also inherited the Spanish throne -so he was King Philip of Spain as well)
The thing about trademark laws in the US is that you kind of have to sue, even if you dont want to sue, if there are instances that can be percieved as infringing on your trademark. Because you have to actively protect it in order to not lose it. So if you make the choice of not suing someone because you dont mind them using your trademark in the way they did, and then later you sue someone else for using your trademark, then it is actually a valid defense for that second party to point out any previous usages of your trademark that you elected not to sue. It seems bonkers, but that's how it is apparently. So whether or not Mattel actually wanted to sue Aqua, they really had no choice in the matter, lest they lose the trademark further down the road
If you're gonna have a wild stab at a British King or Queen, why in GODS NAME would you go for a king of ANOTHER COUNTRY?? For the love of... It's like guessing Madrid for a round on English cities. And yet no one calls him out on how exceptionally idiotic of an answer that was. I mean, mindbogglingly stupid.
Actually Prince Philip of Spain, was also King of England for about 4 years from 1554 to 1558 as a result of his marriage to Queen Mary I. He involved England in Spain’s war against France.
As a result Mary lost the last English possession in France - Calais. So the answer Prince Philip of Spain was half right (although technically at the time Calais was lost Philip had also inherited the Spanish throne -so he was King Philip of Spain as well)
The thing about trademark laws in the US is that you kind of have to sue, even if you dont want to sue, if there are instances that can be percieved as infringing on your trademark. Because you have to actively protect it in order to not lose it. So if you make the choice of not suing someone because you dont mind them using your trademark in the way they did, and then later you sue someone else for using your trademark, then it is actually a valid defense for that second party to point out any previous usages of your trademark that you elected not to sue. It seems bonkers, but that's how it is apparently. So whether or not Mattel actually wanted to sue Aqua, they really had no choice in the matter, lest they lose the trademark further down the road
If you're gonna have a wild stab at a British King or Queen, why in GODS NAME would you go for a king of ANOTHER COUNTRY?? For the love of... It's like guessing Madrid for a round on English cities. And yet no one calls him out on how exceptionally idiotic of an answer that was. I mean, mindbogglingly stupid.