This is the funniest thing I have heard in a long time! I mean really... Jet Star Virtual are just that VIRTUAL!!!If I was them I'd be flattered!Best RegardsBoone,[email protected]"Flying a plane is no different from riding a bicycle. It's just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes."

Frankly, I cannot believe some of the posts that I am reading along this thread. And I don't even know where to begin, except maybe the beginning.I see alot of posts worried about what the VA community stands to lose should Gene Bordelon and JetStar International win or even continue to fight for his intellectual property rights. I'm not even going to get into specifics, because specifics aren't important. What is important is bravery. Mr. Bordelon has decided to fight for something here, and the negetive posts are missing it. Completely missing it.A few years ago, when the budding virtual world of aviation began creating "virtual airlines" the first VAs all emulated their favorite real world airline, i.e. Delta, United, American... to name a few. I remember the reaction of most of these airlines. To sum it up:You can't use OUR name on your VA!!!!You see, rather than be flattered (by the way, a poster earlier said Mr. Bordelon should be "flattered" that Qantas emulated the name JetStar) the real world airline boys were offended that their intellectual property was being used to make ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY.After the smoke cleared, did the VA world die and go away? No, we did not. The truely dedicated enthusiasts stayed and had to create their OWN airlines and in order to be respected, they had to be original. On more than one occasion VAs copied eachother and that was frowned upon. But as time went on, those who worked hard enough (earning NO money from their efforts I might add) and were creative enough, emerged with some of the most impressive airline ideas seen by VA or RL airlines alike. And an unspoken code of conduct was shared by all.What emerged was a VA world, complete with a stockmarket and several payware companies competing to outfit virtual airlines with their wares. Although most attempts at a viable va stockmarket failed, many payware companies are doing at least well enough to keep on selling aircraft. Other companies thrived in this environment. Gmax and FSDS for instance. Abacus, Captainsim, and MelJet to name a couple more. And the websites like Avsim and Flightsim and simviation are flooded with good and even GREAT third party freeware aircraft.For a while, everything was bliss. VA's came and went and the fierce competition that followed advanced some, if not all, of the most advanced third party software available for the Flightsim community.Competition breeds advancement. And originality became king.All of the most successful VA's are successful because they took an original idea and carried it as far and as high as their ideas and resources could carry them. And they did it limited only by their imagination.And they did it WITHOUT the sanction of the big boys. The real world airlines who did not deign to be "flattered" by the enthusiasts who idolized them and only wanted a small piece of their glory. Who instead forced the VA industry into the originality we now see before us today.Mr. Bordelon was one of those originators, an entreprenuer who went through great pains to make sure that his airline need not worry about offending anyone. As any of you other VA's out there will attest, the hardest part of starting an airline, VA or otherwise, is coming up with the name. For the name must not only be catching, but original. original. original. There, I said it three times for those of you who think its not original just because its Airlines, and not Airways. For four years Gene Bordelon has run JetStar International airlines. And his upstart little www.homestead.jetstar.com has grown into a formidable VA. Trading on the VA stock exchange now at 17 dollars a share last time I checked. The aircraft and paint jobs are all stunning to say the least. And anyone who knows Gene Bordelon knows that he is a man of integrity of the highest order.Some of you have said that he is out to make a quick buck. Some have said he should worry about what he is doing to the VA industry. Some have even so much as called him a liar with regards to his trademark issues. All of you are wrong.If this fight does not happen today, it will hurt the VA industry more. If he loses, his airline will bear the name of a real world airline and any new enthusiasts who do not know JetStar's history will think that he is simply copying Qantas' JetStar name. If he loses today, what will it do to the upstart VA of tomorrow? Why would anyone want to put all that effort into a VA, just to have its name stolen from a real airline, thus making the hard fought efforts worth little or nothing? Who would want to run JOE SHMOE Airlines after United decides to open a low cost carrier called JOE SHMOE Airways? Who would want to operate under that shadow?I would like to see posts here of CEO's of VA's. Specifically any CEO who is willing to give up all his hard work for a bigger real world airline to come along and assume their name.By the way... and in closing. Gene Bordelon spells his airline JetStar, capitol J, capitol S. So does Qantas JetStar. That fact ALONE convinced me that someone at Qantas visited Mr. Bordelon's JetStar and took all that he had any rights to... the very name he gave to his passion, his hobby, and his airline.Ponder that before you flame him here...Nuff SaidFoo

Pete:>>Its not Qantas's fault this VA gets hits as a result!Actually yes, it is. The VA may well not have the resources to fight this, but they're in the right under US law. JetStar Airlines / JetStar Airways is certainly close enough to cause confusion to a reasonable person, which is the test in the US.Also, someone posted that the VA hadn't registered their copyright in the US until after Qantas announced their spinoff? Doesn't matter. US copyright law doesn't require registration. Works become copyright the first time they're "published" - which in this case is long before Qantas announced JetStar. Since the original JetStar is a virtual airline, I'd set up a virtual ticket sales section, selling free tickets for virtual trips on their virtual airplanes. Then if Qantas wants to claim that the names don't cause confusion, JetStar can point to - by then probably hundreds or thousands - of customers who've shown up at a 'real' JetStar ticket counter thinking they had a reservation. And won't the ticket agents enjoy explaining THAT one! "I'm sorry sir, but we poached the name of an existing virtual airline, and you've bought a ticket for them not us"Richard

The problem is that the VA JetStar is between a rock and a hard place. It's been suggested that they just 'let it slide' - unfortunately they don't have that right under US law. If you have a copyright - and the VA JetStar clearly does - and someone violates it, you have three legal choices. 1) You can defend your copyright. This is what they're doing.2) You can negotiate an agreement with the violator. The VA tried to do that, but Qantas ignored them, so that's not an option.3) You can abandon your copyright. If your copyright is violated, and you don't defend it, it's considered abandoned. If the VA does that, I guarantee that Qantas will be filing against THEM soon as Qantas will pick up the copyright.So really, the VA had only two choices. Sue Qantas, or fold up their tents and choose a new name, livery etc.There have been numerous cases that went this way in other fields. Mom and Pop company has a copyright or trademark. Big corporation starts using it. Mom and Pop doesn't notice - different area, for example - and they get a letter from the big companies lawyers ordering them to cease and desist using the mark as it now belongs to the big corp, as the Mom and Pop legaly abandoned it by not suing the corp when they started to use it.Richard

Richard,I have been keeping track of this thread silently, and have up to this point been really confused. But now I have to say that your post is the one that makes the most sense.

>>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.I don't know where you went to law school, but you should ask for a refund. Under US copyright law, rights attach to first use, not registration. The copyright registration system is designed to provide any easy way to prove when a work was first published, but if a work was in use prior to your registering it, and you can prove that, that's acceptable. There are certain remedies that aren't available to you if you havent registered, but it doesn't cost you your copyright.Richard

I see allot of posts worried about what the VA community stands to lose should Gene Bordelon and JetStar International win or even continue to fight for his intellectual property rights. Let's take a look at this for one moment!! JIA has only applied for a Trademark of JetStar under the classification of an Airline, Airline Services etc..it has not been granted yet. Is JIA an Airline in the true sense of the word? No Do they operate real planes? No. Do they sell tickets to paying customers? No. Do they provide any real Airline services? No. So it's doubtful their application will be approved under this classification. To extend this classification to Virtual Airlines will require new law which Congress would have to pass, or a Federal Judge would have to rule on. As Judges traditionally hate making rulings establishing new uncharted law, it is doubtful this will happen. So that leaves copyright law. Here too there is a problem, as I have shown in a previous post The name JetStar is used by other established companies including similar types of business being claimed. So I don't think that argument will stand. That leaves the design of the logo. I personally don't see the resemblance, other than they both have a star in it. It could be argued that with a name like JetStar it is likely there would be a star in the logo somewhere, so I think it will be difficult to prove intent to copy here.

If you have a copyright - and the VA JetStar clearly does - and someone violates it, you have three legal choices.I wouldn't say that JetStar clearly has a copyright here. They have only applied for a Trademark under the classification of an Airline. To extend this to Virtual Airlines will require new law, so it's doubtful they will be granted a trademark under this classification. As I have shown in an earlier post, other established businesses, including 2 that fall into this classification uses the name JetStar, so JIA can't claim copyright to the name, as it is already being used. That leaves the Logo design. This is a subjective area, but it can be argued with a name like JetStar it would only be natural a graphic image of a Star may be used.

Nevermind....

:-outta

http://hometown.aol.com/p3superb/images/3e72a43942b48d2b.jpg

There is a fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness".- unknown

"My daddy gives me up, to fight for you"- a US Military Members Child

The Trademark is a different subject. Whether they get that or not is irrelevant to the copyright issue though, so I'll ignore it for now.As to copyright, and to the business name and cybersquatting causes, I would be very surprised if any court finds a substantive difference between "JetStar Airlines" and "JetStar Airways". The primary test is the existance of confusion in the minds of potential customers, and tens of thousands of requests for tickets, submitted resumes, and even other businesses contacting them to solicit business, would seem to be persuasive that such confusion exists. If the travel agency or catering company have been getting similar requests, they might also have a claim. However, the potential for confusion between a real airline and a virtual one is much greater.IMHO the single worst move Qantas made to their case here was licensing a JetStar Virtual Airline all of their own. There are now two Virtual airlines called JetStar - one that's been operating for four years, and can prove that, and one that Qantas has authorized to use the name JetStar in the last few months. THAT, I think, may well haunt Qantas if this gets to court.Richard

QUOTE:Let's take a look at this for one moment!! JIA has only applied for a Trademark of JetStar under the classification of an Airline, Airline Services etc..it has not been granted yet. Is JIA an Airline in the true sense of the word? No Do they operate real planes? No.God forbid you ever come up with an original idea for a virtual airline and have it stolen from a big airline. Like I said, it doesn't matter if he flies real airplanes or not. He made up a fictitious airline, and someone took his ideas and made a REAL airline with them.Consider this, whats to stop me from creating a real company, making real money off the fictitious Beer company on the Simpsons. Duff Beer, I think its called. Hell, why think or work hard when there are so many places to steal ideas from?As for thier application to trademark, unless you are a trademark expert, and I am not either, then perhaps legal details be left to those more qualified and not bantered about here as opinions.Foo

>I don't know where you went to law school, but you should ask>for a refund. Under US copyright law, rights attach to first>use, not registration. The copyright registration system is>designed to provide any easy way to prove when a work was>first published, but if a work was in use prior to your>registering it, and you can prove that, that's acceptable.>There are certain remedies that aren't available to you if you>havent registered, but it doesn't cost you your copyright.It seems to me this case is not about copyrights, but ratherTrademarks.You don't own the Trademark unless its registered, and it won't be registered unless an application is made.Regards.Ernie.

>It seems to me this case is not about copyrights, but ratherTrademarks.:).Cheers,Gosta.http://www.hifisim.com/images/as2betateam.jpg

Yes, they are serious and they should be. Here are just a few articles in the press the week following Qantas' announcement wayyyyyyy back in December.Back on Dec 1 2003 from www.WordLab.com a naming and branding consultant website saw this coming when Qantas announced thier new airline.http://www.wordlab.com/2003_12_01_archive.cfm bottom of the page titled 'Star Crossed'. Dated Dec 5 2003 from the Sydney Herald having a bit of fun with the Qantas CEO and his ad agencies over their naming of the new airline.Bottom of page titled 'Geoff's Star Turn'.http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/04/1070351723415.html An interesting article from regional airline world on naming and branding airlines.http://www.igorinternational.com/press/index.html These media outlets not only saw this coming, but they had fun with it at Qantas' expense. And this was before Mr. Bordelon's JetStar ever fired a single shot. Something to be said for researching BEFORE you name an airline.Foohttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/73534.jpgWe're so low cost, we got the name for FREE!!!

>I'm not making a second post on this subject - I'm posting on>behalf of someone who cannot join the forum as they dont have>a non hotmail.com email account.>>Hey Guys,>>Ive just been reading the posts that have been made over the>whole Qantas Vs Jetstar International thing, and I have to say>ive never laughed so hard in all my life.>>I mean really what drugs is the CEO of Jetstar Intl on ??>C