Swap-bot Time: August 15, 2018 5:26 pm
www.swap-bot.com

Mr ZIP Approves! Simple Warm-up

Launch gallery slideshow

Mr ZIP Approves!  Simple Warm-up
Group:Mr. ZIP Approved!
Swap Coordinator:BetsyPreston (contact)
Swap categories: Themed 
Number of people in swap:10
Location:International
Type:Type 2: Flat mail
Rating requirement:4.85
Last day to signup/drop:March 31, 2018
Date items must be sent by:April 9, 2018
Number of swap partners:2
Description:

Send simple flat mail (postcard, envelope) to your partner with Mr. ZIP. Nothing fancy, but it must include Mr ZIP somewhere, either as an original postal stamp or a reproduction of some kind. Don't overthink it or get too elaborate - this should be a simple piece of mail with Mr ZIP displayed somewhere. This will also be quick - you can prepare your mail in advance, but you'll have just about a week to get it into the mail! Have fun!

Discussion

Swan 03/12/2018 #

Can I draw Mr. ZIP on the card?

BetsyPreston 03/12/2018 #

Yes!! But you might not receive art in return!!

HannahsMommy07 03/12/2018 #

I don't draw well ... can I still draw him ... it might be funny but done with love and work:>???

BetsyPreston 03/13/2018 #

@HannahsMommy07 I'll leave that up to your discretion. Whatever you think is fair to your partner! If you're not sure, maybe include Homegrown Zippy as an enclosed bonus or on the back of the PC?

palmettogirl727 03/29/2018 #

I'm new to this group, but just wondering about this... Wouldn't a photocopy or image downloaded and printed of Mr. Zip be a copyright infringement of USPS property? http://faq.usps.com/?articleId=220066

SilverD 03/30/2018 #

It's fine to use the image as long as you don't try to claim it as your own or try to use it as your own. It's a Registered Trademark that is owned by the USPS. What constitutes trademark infringement?

If a party owns the rights to a particular trademark, that party can sue subsequent parties for trademark infringement. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125. The standard is "likelihood of confusion." To be more specific, the use of a trademark in connection with the sale of a good constitutes infringement if it is likely to cause consumer confusion as to the source of those goods or as to the sponsorship or approval of such goods. In deciding whether consumers are likely to be confused, the courts will typically look to a number of factors, including: (1) the strength of the mark; (2) the proximity of the goods; (3) the similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; (5) the similarity of marketing channels used; (6) the degree of caution exercised by the typical purchaser; (7) the defendant's intent. Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elect. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 820 (1961).

So, for example, the use of an identical mark on the same product would clearly constitute infringement. If I manufacture and sell computers using the mark "Apple," my use of that mark will likely cause confusion among consumers, since they may be misled into thinking that the computers are made by Apple Computer, Inc. Using a very similar mark on the same product may also give rise to a claim of infringement, if the marks are close enough in sound, appearance, or meaning so as to cause confusion. So, for example, "Applet" computers may be off-limits; perhaps also "Apricot." On the other end of the spectrum, using the same term on a completely unrelated product will not likely give rise to an infringement claim. Thus, Apple Computer and Apple Records can peacefully co-exist, since consumers are not likely to think that the computers are being made by the record company, or vice versa.

Between the two ends of the spectrum lie many close cases, in which the courts will apply the factors listed above. So, for example, where the marks are similar and the products are also similar, it will be difficult to determine whether consumer confusion is likely. In one case, the owners of the mark "Slickcraft" used the mark in connection with the sale of boats used for general family recreation. They brought an infringement action against a company that used the mark "Sleekcraft" in connection with the sale of high-speed performance boats. Because the two types of boats served substantially different markets, the court concluded that the products were related but not identical. However, after examining many of the factors listed above, the court concluded that the use of Sleekcraft was likely to cause confusion among consumers.

https://cyber.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm

palmettogirl727 03/31/2018 #

Thanks SilverD-I had already printed one, then got concerned about the legal stuff. Helpful info to clarify.

lou 04/ 1/2018 #

(As it’s through government, none of that may apply, anyone interested should research USPS rights of potential enforcement from that perspective etc)

SilverD 04/ 1/2018 #

You can use Mr Zip to recreate/create however you want. Just don't use it for business or sell it. Anything, even copyrighted or trademarked art or whatever can be recreated and given as gifts. If you sell them or claim them as your own then that's wrong! I have used other artists inspiration and I've credited the artist and that is the proper thing to do.

If an artist has been deceased for 50 or 100 years (and I don't know the reason for the difference) then it's anyone's to use, unfortunately. Van Gogh, Manet, Alphonse Mucha have been reproduced A LOT!

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Click here to log in.

I received the item
I sent the item

Received from:
For multiple members, separate names with spaces

Description: