... Eric, regarding intentional fraud (which, as you say, would not be covered by a policy of liability insurance). Frankly, I hadn't considered that potential problem.
This comment raises another question in my mind:
The club logo should not be used in any manner in which the public might reasonably infer an endorsement of a private, profit-making enterprise. The chip in question does more than reasonably infer that. It screams "endorsement."
Isn't that exactly what happens at the club convention? The dealers who buy tables are every bit as much "private, profit-making enterprises" as the promoters of the Reno show.
Does the fact that the club allows it's logo -- hell, it's very essence -- to be associated with the convention, mean that a member of the public "might reasonably infer an endorsement" by the club of the dealers who have tables at the show?
If a table is sold to someone who sells a 65 cent Paul-son fantasy chip for $1000 to someone who saw the club logo and thought that the show was a club event or club-sanctioned event, could the club be sued for complicity in perpetrating a fraud?
Couldn't this happen just as easily at the club convention? In fact, more easily, since the club's "sanctioning" of the event is much more obvious in the case of our own convention.
I don't have good answers to these questions off the top of my head. I'll discuss the issue with #1 son (who is an intellectual property lawyer and deals with "endorsements" on a regular basis -- not exactly in this context, but he may have a useful thought or two).
----- jim o\-S
|