Rodrigo Ordonez Licona wrote:
> Momentum is strong enough that we would follow developers to a red6 or 
> red7 (or whatever new name it needs) project in no time.

RED6!?  Wow, is that an upgrade!  I want!

LOL

-- Dante

> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On 
> Behalf Of *Dominick Accattato
> *Sent:* Martes, 21 de Agosto de 2007 04:35 p.m.
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [Red5] H.264 codec on Flash player... but not for Red5?
> 
> Hank, as always I appreciate your comments on these matters.
> 
> Additionally, I just checked an existing site I created and Sorenson is 
> still streaming fine, and I'd imagine that On2 will as well.  I had no 
> doubts that they would as Adobe strives for backward compatibility even 
> though they have made security enhancements that broke existing content 
> in the past.
> 
> I'm not sure why he wrote that it doesn't support sorenson
> 
> On 8/21/07, *hank williams* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> 
>     1. I am not clear what name you are saying red5 comes close to
>     infringing.
>      
>     2. If it does, there are no damages without notice. You cannot sue
>     if you ask someone to change the name and they do. Its not like
>     copyright infringement where any infringement creates a statutory
>     liability. Therefore any intelligent open source project would just
>     change its name. This would not be a smart strategy for eliminating
>     open source and I *strongly* doubt red5 is at any risk from this
>     kind of a plan.
>      
>     Regards,
>     Hank
> 
>      
>     On 8/21/07, *Donnacha* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> 
>         RE: Trademarks
> 
>         To clarify what I meant, this issue has come up in discussion with
>         some very switched on people but not, I have to stress, anyone in
>         Adobe itself.  The context was people in fairly high positions,
>         discussing the tricky problem, faced by many proprietary software
>         makers, of how to counter OSS competition without provoking a
>         publicity backlash; Adobe/Red5 came up as a perfect case study.
> 
>         There was total agreement that the Red5 developers have been
>         meticulous in ensuring that they didn't infringe Adobe's IP but the
>         name itself was identified as their Achilles heal, not necessarily
>         because it infringes a trademark or servicemark, although it
>         may, but
>         because it comes close enough to justify a court case.
> 
>         The case of a claimant against Red5 would not be strong enough to
>         guarantee a win and, therefore, would not be worth taking UNLESS a
>         third party anonymously funded the legal costs as a distraction/FUD
>         tactic, just as Microsoft part-funded SCO's anti-Linux
>         actions.  This
>         form of anonymous funding is 100% legal and very common practice
>         among
>         American corporations.
> 
>         In the case of targeting OSS projects, the presumption is that no
>         formal structure is in place to fund a defense and that the
>         costs will
>         be borne by the lead developers with no prospect, in this type of
>         action, of re-couping their costs even if they win - each side eats
>         their own costs.
> 
>         This expensive process massively favors corporations and the vast
>         majority of these disputes never make it to court, never come to
>         public attention.
> 
>         As any such action would be a once-off opportunity and would be held
>         in reserve until it can be used to maximum effect, probably
>         after the
>         project goes 1.0 and a lot of momentum has built up behind the
>         disputed name - being forced to change it at that point would be a
>         serious set-back.
> 
>         When the project was initially launched, I presumed that Red5 was
>         temporary title, a cute Star Wars reference that would soon be
>         replaced with a better name, one for which the .com was still
>         available.  I never expected it would last this long, I figured
>         that a
> 
>         _______________________________________________
>         Red5 mailing list
>         [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>         http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
> 
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Red5 mailing list
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dominick Accattato, CTO
> Infrared5 Inc.
> www.newviewnetworks.com <http://www.newviewnetworks.com>
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Red5 mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org


_______________________________________________
Red5 mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org

Reply via email to