On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 04:43 +0100, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote: > On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 21:24 -0500, Matthew Rubenstein wrote: > > You're pitching domains that are "asterisk related", which, as nothing > > but names, means they have the word "asterisk" in them. You're pitching > > them to people on the "asterisk-biz" list, "Commercial and > > Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion". Your offerings clearly infringe > > the Digium trademark on "Asterisk" used to identify Digium's "Asterisk" > > product. > > Asterisk related could also mean that they are related to what the > product does, or it could be in a way that if you know asterisk you > would understand the relationship even if it doesnt infringe. I believe > in one email he clarified 'related' to say that they dont have > trademarked property in them. > > One could for example be dcapconsultants.com or something, which would > be 'related' but difficult to say that it infringes.
True in a vacuum, but their subsequent defensive comments before I replied indicate they're dilution. -- (C) Matthew Rubenstein _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz