Ray-Ban Asks Rand Paul to Quit Selling Their Product

The good news is that when the next POTUS turns out to be a Republican, Scat is likely to stay in Germany for at least 4 more years.
 
hillary_result.png
 
should they be forced to sell a product to someone who's life style they oppose?

Of course not.
OK, so once that is settled, once you sell a product, who owns it?
I mean, if I buy a Dodge truck and put the logo of my Honda dealership on it, does Chrysler Corporation have any right to demand I remove it?

If not, then we are just dealing with a corporation that holds different political values than Rand Paul, right?
 
I just bought 50 pairs of ray bans. Now I can be an elitist Rand Paul supporter :thup:

I've never understood the appeal of expensive sunglasses. Are they not made out of plastic too? Status symbols have always perplexed me, that people will shell out serious money to feel they're better than everyone else.
Ask Rand Paul. He obviously thinks it is a serious issue.

One more reason congress people are just estranged from normal people. I have great sunglasses that I paid less than $20 for. I wouldn't have my kids go without new shoes so I can buy Ray Bans. It isn't a Rand Paul thing, it's an American aristocracy thing, like the old Soviet nomenklatura class.
 
OK, so once that is settled, once you sell a product, who owns it?
I mean, if I buy a Dodge truck and put the logo of my Honda dealership on it, does Chrysler Corporation have any right to demand I remove it?

If not, then we are just dealing with a corporation that holds different political values than Rand Paul, right?

The purchaser owns it, right up to the point where the individual uses your branded product in a commercial application (as Rand did). At that point you are being attached to that individual by proxy UNLESS they have removed all of your logos and identifying markings from it.
 
Looks like words aren't the only thing Rand Paul likes to plagiarize.
 
I could have sworn there's like one company that controls all the glasses in the world. I forget the company name, but they have an Iron Fist on eyewear. Anyway, I can't see them allowing anyone to just re-brand and sell their product without compensation. I don't know about their politics, but cash is always King.
It's a fact. :thup:
 
OK, so once that is settled, once you sell a product, who owns it?
I mean, if I buy a Dodge truck and put the logo of my Honda dealership on it, does Chrysler Corporation have any right to demand I remove it?

If not, then we are just dealing with a corporation that holds different political values than Rand Paul, right?

The purchaser owns it, right up to the point where the individual uses your branded product in a commercial application (as Rand did). At that point you are being attached to that individual by proxy UNLESS they have removed all of your logos and identifying markings from it.
So, what you are telling me is that a pizza shop cannot put their logo on a Chrysler mini van that they use to deliver their pizzas, right?
How about the Police Department of New York City?

NYPD_Police_car_3278.JPG


When does that suit go to court?
 
I could have sworn there's like one company that controls all the glasses in the world. I forget the company name, but they have an Iron Fist on eyewear. Anyway, I can't see them allowing anyone to just re-brand and sell their product without compensation. I don't know about their politics, but cash is always King.
It's a fact. :thup:
They are not rebranded. The RayBan logo is still there, along with a silk screened image Paul's people added. This is no different than me putting my business name on my pick-up truck.

EXCEPT that RayBan doesn't want their name associated with a politician they disagree with.
 

Forum List

Back
Top