Talk:Kieron Dwyer
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contradiction edit
I wish I knew how to tag this to get some attention so that this matter gets resolved, but this page claims Dwyer lost the Starbucks suit while the Starbucks page claims it was settled. Obviously both can't be true.
Sure enough the citation listed in this article indicates that while Dwyer lost a temporary injunction stating that he could not sell or profit from the use of the starbucks parody due to tarnishment NOT infringement, he did have the right to display the logo on his website. As stated, this article is inaccurate and lacks detail. Balonkey 21:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Wisdom of using the consumer whore image on Wikipedia edit
Guys, how wise is it for use to use this image on Wikipedia? Did Kieron Dwyer grant us permission to use it? And since it was the centerpiece of a lawsuit could Starbucks have a legitimate complaint about us posting it here? Mr Christopher 15:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)