http://laist.com/2007/09/08/thats_hot_now_c.php All comments for "That's Hot." Now Come and Sue Us en-us 2008 NeilA Sun, 22 Jun 2008 15:00:00 -0800 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss neilthemod1@blueyonder.co.uk neilthemod1@blueyonder.co.uk 60 http://laist.com/2007/09/08/thats_hot_now_c.php#comment-1192217 http://laist.com/2007/09/08/thats_hot_now_c.php#comment-1192217 Comments Sun, 09 Sep 2007 08:25:00 -0800 <p>I'd hoped there was a moratorium on Ms. Hilton stories, but it seems I hoped in vain. So that's two things under my skin with one article: the aforementioned Ms. Hilton, and the idea that such a generic phrase could be trademarked.</p> http://laist.com/2007/09/08/thats_hot_now_c.php#comment-1192012 http://laist.com/2007/09/08/thats_hot_now_c.php#comment-1192012 Comments Sat, 08 Sep 2007 14:39:14 -0800 <p>She's a commodity who's been bought and sold and re-sold by her own parents since she was very young: the merchandising of their/her name, the tacky carwash ad, even the sex tapes all seem to not phase these parents one bit as their baby girl preens in the limelight for their mutual benefit. They never bothered, with all their money, to make sure that she somehow got through even the crappiest college. So of course they don't have a sense of humor about this. But seriously, the card shouldn't be using her face: that is personal, and I wouldn't want mine used in an unflattering way, either, even as a minor celebrity. That's what celebrities have to work with: their images. But the "It's Hot" phrase on its own: that should never have been trademarked, since it's too generic. Maybe if everyone started using it, she'd have no one specific to go after. You can't say of a plate, "That's hot?"</p>