On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 04:16:50PM +0100, Andrew Flegg wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 15:59, Greg KH <gre...@suse.de> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:24:26PM +0200, Jos Poortvliet wrote: > >> > >> Ok, LF thinks the name Smeegol, while funny and inventive, might not be the > >> best name of the decade. > > > > Sorry, but it's not up to them to like or dislike a name that has > > nothing to do with their product name. There is no trademark law > > violation here at all, so for them to claim there is, is disingenuous. > > To play Devil's Advocate (and, of course, IANAL), the trademark is > completely contained within the name "Smeegol": > > "S" + "MeeGo".lower() + "l" > > Is this grounds for complaint with regards to trademark law?
No it isn't. Oh sure, you can try, but as it is a totally different word, and it actually comes from a different source (i.e. you didn't randomly create it), there is lots of defense that it is not confusing at all. And that's the point, trademark law is all about "confusion", I don't think that anyone is confused that the two are different offerings at all here. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list MeeGo-dev@meego.com http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
