IP law is very complicated in the US, extremely complicated. I'm not even qualified to really comment on it. However I can tell I actually understand it a lot better than you. You be assuming things bro, doesn't work that way.
IP law is complicated everywhere, especially considering the globalized world we live in and the fact that each country has it's own laws. Most lawyers don't know shit about it.
Don't take my post out of context. My arguments about IP protection were targeted at your example about the guy getting money by filming himself while driving a Porsche, not the LP case. Your example was flawed, if you make a video using a Porsche car for commercial use you're essentially using Porsche's IPs for yourself, which is basically the same as making a commercial game with licensed cars.
Oh, by the way, stop using the "appeal to authority" fallacy. If you do know so much about IP laws as you say, then please, enlighten us with your knowledge about the subject, it'll certainly help the discussion. But coming up with "i know more than you, therefore i'm right" simply won't do it.
An example of where you're absolutely wrong and would know that if you spent 10 seconds thinking it over. There's a lot of case law addressing this even on Wikipedia, by all means, read it.
Feel free to post it.
Because of trademarks, not copyright, calling it "IP" makes it confusing because they're entirely different things with different rules.
I used the expression intellectual property exactly because it's a genre that includes trademarks, copyright, design rights, patents and other stuff. While the rules are different, the essence is still the same: to grant the monopoly over the rights to use something.
Keep in mind that my argument was targeted at your car example, and a Porsche car isn't only protected by trademark, but also by design rights (and patents, but these don't apply to your example), which is why i used the genre "Intellectual Property" instead of naming the specific rights protected by it.
Yes, it's because of trademarks, which also apply to your example.
Eh you know what, you're normally very thoughtful, you appear to be disinclined to do so here despite a wealth of good information being out there for you. Believe whatever you want, fuck it.
So i'm not being thoughtful because i disagree with you?