Gollnick
Musical Director
- Joined
- Mar 22, 1999
- Messages
- 29,258
everything else is second or third hand at best.
Exactly!
A little first-hand input could clear the whole thing up and put a quick end to these rumors and accusations.
It is perfectly true that there is absolutely no legal obligation for Mr. Miller to answer accusations of design piracy made in an internet discussion forum. However, not doing so is not enhancing his businesses reputation or his own.
Media-savvy businesses have discovered that when rummors and accusations start to fly, the best thing to do is blunt them with the facts and be open and honest about it.
If Mr. Miller has a license or ownership interest in these designs, he would, IMHO, do himself and his business a great favor by quickly and factually explaining that. All questions regarding intellectual property theft would be immediately mute.
As I have said repeatedly, to me (and I suspect others) it doesn't matter how good the knives may be, how well-designed, how controlled the blood spray, how miraculous the steel, if the designs are stolen. If Mr. Miller wants to get on with a discussion of how good the knives are, how well-designed they are, how controlled the blood spray is, or how miraculous the steel is, he must first answer the issue of the ownership of the designs. Only after that issue has been dispensed with can we talk about other aspects of the knives. So, if Mr. Miller can easily address the design issue perhaps by simply asserting that he has a license or partial ownership, and if wants to get on with discussion the other aspects of his knives, he would be well-advised to go beyond what is legally required of him and simply make those assertions.
He is not legally required to do that, no. But, I think it would be a very good idea nonetheless.