Quote:
Originally Posted by jtrent77
Was City Creek taken out of anyone's name? No. City Creek is still in the name of your beloved apartment complex. No one took City Creek out of their name and no one is claiming ownership to that name, it was changed from "at" to "on the."
But honestly, let it go, I am fine with you being annoyed that your apartment complex decided to change their name, you can even be annoyed with me for agreeing that was a wise decision for your apartment complex to make, but there is really no point in a further discussion on it.
|
I like living here well enough.. But beloved would be a little bit over-the-top...
The fact that they change their name does not annoying me in the slightest.... What annoys me is ridiculous fraudulent lawsuits.. And this is merely one example. I also agree that it was a wise decision.. Because the LDS church is a multibillion dollar operation.. They can afford more lawyers :-)
And I'm not trying to bash the LDS church in fact I regularly defended them on here.. I just feel that this was a really distasteful thing of them to do.. And I think that this type of ridiculous lawsuit is making everybody so afraid that nobody can do anything anymore.. We can't even have a decent playground in the park anymore... I'm glad I was a kid in the 80s and not now.
Your correct.. on and at the do have different meanings.. For example I'm on North Temple.. Or I'm at Library Square... But regardless of what those words mean.. It legally does not mean anything to the LDS church nor is it any of their business... Why.. Because it's not called the Seasons At / on City creek center.. Is that so hard to understand.
Who cares if people know city creek center as city creek.. That's the LDS churches fault for choosing a long 🞵🞵🞵 name that nobody wants to say.. If it was to be known as city creek then why didn't they just call it city creek.. I'll tell you why.. City Creek cannot be trademarked... Nor can the LDS church pretend that they have a trademark on that name.. City Creek is open Game anybody can use it.. And the church is just going to have to live with it because it's not theirs.. they don't own it... And they can't buy it.. They can only scare people with a legal expenses.. And eventually they will try to scare somebody that would rather make a point...
(deleted sarcastic comment, people take stuff too seriously)