On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 11:34 -0700, Russell Senior wrote:
> >>>>> "Dylan" == Dylan Reinhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> Dylan> Dave Mandel registered the name "PORTLAND LINUX/UNIX GROUP"
> Dylan> with the state of Oregon in November of 1999.  Had PDXLUG used
> Dylan> that name after that time, Dave Mandel would have a legitimate
> Dylan> beef.  But we didn't.
> 
> Dylan> Dave Mandel *also* registered the name "PORTLAND LINUX USERS
> Dylan> GROUP" with the state of Oregon, but did so in July
> Dylan> 2003... well after PDXLUG was making use of it.  It's fairly
> Dylan> clear that the fact that we *were* using it inspired the
> Dylan> registration.
> 
> Dylan> The point of name registration is to make it clear which names
> Dylan> are in use by whom.  There is some degree of passive
> Dylan> entitlement to existing usage, but not much.  If PLUG only
> Dylan> claimed passive entitlement, that might be something... but
> Dylan> PLUG really can't have it both ways here.  Either you were
> Dylan> entitled to that name when we started using it or you weren't.
> Dylan> Dave's actions suggest that he knows you weren't.
> 
> This has been debunked several times.  PLUG never stopped using
> "Portland Linux User Group".  It just started using another name
> _too_.  I have pointed people at the wayback machine's history of the
> PLUG Clinic website that demonstrates as much.  I have described the
> meeting at which the new name appeared.  The timing of the July 2003
> registration is not relevant, it just codified previous practice.
> 
> 

If PLUG was using both names why would we need to use the wayback
machine to look at a historic page where the phrase *used to be* used?

Sounds like you deprecated the old phrase for the new one, which we then
picked up and forked from.  

What is the liscensing on "a portland linux users group" ?



_______________________________________________
PDXLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pdxlug.org/mailman/listinfo/pdxlug
IRC: irc.freenode.net #pdxlug

Reply via email to