>I read this and actually had a bit of a smile until I>realized they were serious!>>http://www.flightsim.com/cgi/kds?$=main/no...04/jets0421.htm>>ya, this is just what our hobby needs is PR like this crap. >And Quantas out of all of 'em. This is the airline that>actually worked with us to help try to get the 'Dreaming'>liveries available from Peter Max!Here's what Jetstar VA should do: email back a confirmation number to all who email them. The confirmation number is good for a flight on their (virtual) airline. Indicate their ticket will be comp'ed.When 100,000 passengers show up to the Qantas/Jetstar ticket counter that should get their attention!-- Steve Cullen

A Copyright is a Copyright. If somebody started a business in the airline or aviation industry for that matter and called it "Qantas FBO Services" they'd be all over you! If Jetstar is a legally copyrighted trademark, which it is, Jetstar VA has the rights and should be paid for them if Qantas is going to use them. Anything short of that is copyright infringement which is against the law.Case in point: I used to live in a tiny town in Oklahoma. There was a family owned Roast Beef Sandwich store called "Arbics" after the family name. Arbe's, the roast beef sanwich chain, sued and put them out of business. Just goes to show that intellectual right and copyrights extend to name "similarity" as well. Don't count Jetstar out, stranger things have happened. GO JETSTAR!!!

>Airlines or Airways--I think it's odd that Qantas wouldn't>initialy go with "airlines," which leads me to believe that>they did know about Jetstar VA and changed their name>accordingly.Have to disagree with your logic here.Airways has commonly been used by Qantas and many other airlines.QEA "Qantas Empire Airways" was a formerly used name around the same period that BOAC "British Overseas Airways Corporation" (now British Airways)and TEAL "Tasman Empire Airways Ltd. " ( now Air New Zealand" ). An incestuous lot :-)The system is not a Justice system! - It is a Legal system. When it comes to court action....... he with the most money wins!Roger

>A Copyright is a Copyright. If somebody started a business>in the airline or aviation industry for that matter and called>it "Qantas FBO Services" they'd be all over you! If Jetstar>is a legally copyrighted trademark, which it is, Jetstar VA>has the rights and should be paid for them if Qantas is going>to use them. Anything short of that is copyright infringement>which is against the law.The problem is that civil cases defending a trademark such as this can exhaust the financial resources of an individual rather quickly. Qantas is probably counting on this fact.I just think that anything you can do creatively (and legally) outside of the civil justice system can go a long way to even up the playing field.Just my $0.02-- Steve Cullen

Well, I am not going to do all the work for you guys, especially those that like to jump to conclusions without checking out the facts, BUT:-The TOY airline has NOT been registered yet nor assigned to an examining attorney at this stage. But an APPLICATION was filed on December 8 last year not too long after the Qantas announcement about Jetstar.Incidentally, the Qantas application was filed in November last year and if memory serves me right, that is BEFORE the month of December. Now that fact alone says a great deal.Just do a search of the Patent/Trademark Office and remember that Qantas being registered as an Australian company will file in its own country.Both filed under international class 039 which is as follows:- Class: 39 Air travel services; airline services; aircraft chartering; passenger transport and air cargo transport services; courier services; transport and delivery of goods; storage of goods; travel agency services; booking and reservation of travel services including but not limited to booking and reservation services for holidays and tours; providing information and data relating to the transport of goods and people; tourist information services; sight seeing tour and cruise arranging services; package holiday services; car hire services; bonus program for frequent air travellers including the supply of benefits in connection with transportation and travel, priority boarding, check-in, seating and reservation services, ticket upgrades, augmented frequent flier mileageNow Qantas I can understand filing under this class, but a TOY airline???? Knowing the Aussie culture, I bet the Aussie (REAL) airline personnel are still in hysterics over this one. My money is on Qantas.

ROFL ... Well VA tickets have got to be a hell of a lot cheaper than real ailine tickets HAHAHA

Hello All,Some years ago, I ran into the same type situation. I owned and operated a Porsche racing and restoration shop named: Porschemeister Inc. Porsche was on a rampage then wanting money from EVERYONE who sold anything Porsche related, used the Porsche logo, parts numbers, or image in their advertising.On our ads, we had a Turbo Ruf pictured, (for those who don't know what a Turbo Ruf is: Ruf automobiles uses Porsche body's and some suspension parts and then creates their own supercar with the Ruf name, and are registered in Germany as a legit manufacturer), the point is: Those cars, although they look almost identical as a Porsche Turbo, are in face registered as a Ruf CTR, BTR CTR2 and so on, and are most expensive.To make a long story short, Porschemeister Inc. was MY registered trademark in this country. Bought and paid for. They said they would sue, they also said I could not use the Porsche image in my advertising. I told them to sue.We went to court, proved our case, and won flat out . . . the crowning blow to Porsche was when the panel of judges asked what type car was in the advertising . . . and we proved it was a Ruf, NOT A PORSCHE. A year later Porsche offered to buy the name very quietly for a large amount of money so they could keep on sueing others who used their images . . . I refused. It was mine, bought and paid for and it had become a matter of principal.So yes, I very well understand JetStar VA and their rights . . . the boys in Q's advertising and marketing department should have done their homework just a wee bit better.Best to all,Clayton T. DopkeMajor, USAF (retired)"Drac"

>We went to court, proved our case, and won flat out . . . the crowning blow to Porsche was when the panel of judges asked what type car was in the advertising . . . and we proved it was a Ruf, NOT A PORSCHE. A year later Porsche offered to buy the name very quietly for a large amount of money so they could keep on sueing others who used their images . . . I refused. It was mine, bought and paid for and it had become a matter of principal.http://www.hifisim.com/images/as2betateam.jpg

I don't see the big deal!Sure the names are similar but thats it! The Australian JetStar aircraft liveries and website look nothing like the JetStar International VA website. ( the Australian JetStar aircraft and webpage look much better )Qantas wound not have used the name if it was properly and exactly copywrited but thats not the case is it! This is a VA airline using the name JetStar International Airlines. Qantas has named there new carrier JetStar. Bid differences there! Its not Qantas's fault this VA gets hits as a result!Your argument is dumbfounded! Thats like Qantas suing every other airline that uses Airways in its logo! Qantas Airways is the second oldest airline in the world after KLM! So since there trading name is Qantas Airways does this mean they can sue all VA's that have airways in there name? Does this mean they can sue other airlines that use airways in there trading name?I can't wait to fly JetStar. There based at Avalon airport just 10 miles from my home :)Pete

Howdy,and TEAL "Tasman Empire Airways Ltd. " ( now Air New Zealand" ).Errrr ... you forgot the National Airways Corporation (NAC) phase there. :-lol

If QANTAS indeed filed for trademark protection before the VA did (which they apparently did, which makes me think the VA did it ONLY to be able to sue QANTAS and make a quick buck) QANTAS has the first rights to the name even if the VA existed earlier.Go QANTAS in this one, those kiddos in Jetstar VA are pathetic.

One is a VA the other is RL Airline. They are not in the same business. One is in the Computer Entertainment business the other is in the Air travel and cargo business. If internet traffic is getting to the VA website looking to book tickets instead of the Qantas site, that would be annoying. What they should do is offer a link to Qantas for a fee of .05 per hit :)All the traffic they say they are getting would pay for their site many times over. For Qantas it would be a partnership that might be great publicity.I choose the win-win solution :)

>Thats like Qantas suing every other airline that uses Airways in its logo!http://www.hifisim.com/images/as2betateam.jpg

Oh dear - this is not good.Qantas have also made a terrible mistake in using the word 'Jet' in conjunction with Orange in the livery colours. I guess they will soon have a writ issued by the legal eagles employed by EasyJet for using some of their trademark.I would suggest the owner of Jetstar International is trying to get some dough to pay for his bandwidth and could never afford the legal costs - unless of course someone has agreed to go pro bono. Perhaps a better way would have been to appeal to the Qantas conscience (if they have one) and who knows it may have worked - though I doubt it.I think Jetstar Airways is here to stay - unfortunately - and will at worst shore up Qantas' market share in this region. Perish the thought but this mob may have a claim next.http://www.jetstar.co.uk/Andy b

The VA ill be lucky to get reimbursed for its costs ...... There are THREE airlines with the same name ...... Sun Air!! One is in South Africa, another is in the Caribbean ... and another is in Europe somewhere :(