altruità

12:12 Dec 21, 2012 

Jim! as always, you really find the most suitable solutions. thank you guys for the time you put into this "tortuous" question! I do appear to come up with the most contorted questions!
everyone was really spot on,but the issue is, as always, that terms are not always identical between common and civil law as Giles said.

09:44 Dec 21, 2012 

for your research and all your thoughtful contributions :)

08:41 Dec 21, 2012 

That looks good.

08:38 Dec 21, 2012 

This is the "Equation between broad recognition of a brand and owership rights to that brand". Because if it isn't registered you have some rights based on "pre-uso" and "notorietà". Wiki:
Si distingue il marchio di fatto dal marchio registrato che, in virtù del processo di registrazione dinanzi all'Ufficio Italiano Brevetti e Marchi (UIBM), gode di una protezione rafforzata in quanto ha data certa, mentre il marchio di fatto deve dimostrare sia la notorietà che il preuso esteso.

07:30 Dec 21, 2012 

"Ownership" indicates the state of possession while "private property" refers to the thing possessed, which means you have to formulate the phrase differently depending on which one you use.

And as Jim says, "altruità" is a concept from civil law with no direct equivalent in common law.

So far, I have offered a version using Giulia's "ownership" while fbbest has proposed "misappropriation", which is promising but adds a notion of unlawfulness not present in "altruità" (and, like "appropriation" without the "mis", shifts the focus from the state of the thing to the action of seizing it).

@Jim
How would you formulate the phrase using "private property"?

@fbbest
How would you formlate the phrase using "(mis)appropriation"?

22:17 Dec 20, 2012 

speaking English in a different language. I considered "ownership", but the whole point about "altruità" is that it is NOT yours and to take it is to steal. It is on the other side of the fence. While neither of us can find a true synonym of altruità in English, which very probably doesn't exist, I feel that "private property" (keep out) expresses this much better than ownership which focuses much more on what IS yours, rather than what is NOT yours.

20:58 Dec 20, 2012 

"Recognition" sounds OK.

But "private property" is not a great solution for "altruità". Giulia's suggestion is much better.

We'll get there...

19:55 Dec 20, 2012 

"Notorietà" here is a technical legal term governing brand names (I think it is in the CC), not a metaphor. I think I'm a few steps ahead of you here Giles. The English technical (nearest) equivalent for "notorietà di marchio" is "(strong) brand recognition", as far as I know which has a different focus.

19:21 Dec 20, 2012 

Or "visibility", if you want to change the metaphor, Jim.

But that's beside the point. The question is about "altruità", which "ownership" conveys reasonably well.

18:48 Dec 20, 2012 

18:01 Dec 20, 2012 

The idea seems to be:

by ignoring/obscuring the equivalence of brand notoriety and ownership, X would in effect be seeking to gain possession of another's brand.

FWIW

15:47 Dec 20, 2012 

Apologies everyone,I'm travelling today and internet access is terrible. Yes Jim is on the right track,and this is a civil case where a sub sub licensee is trying to register a well known trade mark,due to alleged forfeiture for nonuse. And what the court is trying to say is that one can't just come along and register a well known brand as its own. Will try to post more info later when I get home and have decent access. In the meanwhile thank you guys for your input and help.

00:29 Dec 20, 2012 

I think what the guy is trying to say is that just because a brand is everywhere for everybody to see and read, does not mean that it is not private property, it is and if you destroy that relationship anybody can use anybody else's brand.

23:46 Dec 19, 2012 

An unregistered trade mark? That might make sense.

23:30 Dec 19, 2012 

belonging to another?

23:28 Dec 19, 2012 

thanks Thomas, uh it's quite late, I just read a bit further down the document and it also states:
l'uso del marchio da parte dell'attrice è certo che questa ha registrato ed usato un marchio che non le poteva appartenere non soltanto perche ****altrui**** per notorieta rna anche perche concretamente usato per contraddistinguere prodotti fabbricati e messi in commercia da altri.

I don't think that in this case I can use too loose a translation. :-(
perhaps something along the lines of other's property, but it sounds awful...I think I need to get rest.