Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com): > I gotta show these guys *everything*...
It's worse than that: If you want us to understand that you did a trademark search not just at USPTO but also at EUIPO, Canadian Intellectual Property Office, India Trade Marks Registry, WIPO, CIPC, China Trademark Office, and all the other significant registries, even though you mentioned _only_ 'a little research on USPTO', you gotta teach us mind-reading. It would also be handy if you comprehended that a common-law trademark is a perfectly valid trademark, and that many significant and legally strong trademarks are that way without registration. Which should not be surprising to anyone who's also studied copyright law. Even though copyrights and trademarks are different fish, the concept of a valid ownership claim without registration should be familiar from basic knowledge of either area of law. > So still, as far as I can research, Straver ain't got squat. [...] > Did you notice how I phrased my original assertion? I said: I gotta show this guy *everything*. A common-law trademark is not just 'some level of protection under the law'. It's an actual trademark. You should read more (or perhaps read better) before speaking, Steve. > We also both know that registered marks are easier to defend and more > likely to have draw substantial monetary damages upon finding of > infringement than common law marks. Actually, the only difference in legal systems I'm familiar with (sadly, that's mostly the USA, though I'm trying to do some readings about other national arrangements) is that (1) a registered trademark has much wider geographic scope, and (2) registration consitutes 'constructive notice' to infringers that plaintiff otherwise must show through explicit measures. The day I see Google and Amazon > depending on common law marks, I'll give M.C. Straver a little more > credit. They doubtless do through many minor marks if only because it's not dawned on them to spend $330/decade (or whatever it is now) to keep those registered. But, sorry, your ignorance cannot be excused by 'I don't see the big boys doing this' for many reasons including the extablishment of such a mark being not an action you can 'see' but rather something that arises automatically through using a mark in business. > Absolutely true. But to me, vendors matter, and I won't use software > from somebody as douchatudenous as this guy. He makes Linus and Lennart > look like pleasant people. Certainly your privilege -- but, to just by your bellyaching, you'd think it was difficult to just substitute a slightly different name and logo, which it's not. You may not like the guy's business model, but it's a perfectly valid and compliant open source one, that happens to be, FWIW, the same as Red Hat's. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
