On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 13:21 -0400, David Boyd wrote:
Hi John,
Are there any updates to this thread. I have not seen any further
response from Digium, in the last 45- 50 days, and therefore am
wondering if there will be any additional response.
-Original Message-
From: John Todd
On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 13:25 -0700, John Todd wrote:
On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 13:21 -0400, David Boyd wrote:
Hi John,
Are there any updates to this thread. I have not seen any further
response from Digium, in the last 45- 50 days, and therefore am
wondering if there will be any
and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk
Discussion asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk developers
and consultants
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:53:05 -0500
Brett
@lists.digium.com
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk developers
and consultants
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:53:05 -0500
Brett -
Sorry for the delay on this - many of us were off-site yesterday,
and today has been catch-up while writing snippets of this throughout
On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 13:21 -0400, David Boyd wrote:
Hi John,
Are there any updates to this thread. I have not seen any further
response from Digium, in the last 45- 50 days, and therefore am
wondering if there will be any additional response.
I hope that I am not speaking out of turn here,
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Trixter aka Bret McDanel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 13:21 -0400, David Boyd wrote:
Hi John,
Are there any updates to this thread. I have not seen any further
response from Digium, in the last 45- 50 days, and therefore am
wondering if
At 10:02 PM +0200 2008/7/29, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 13:21 -0400, David Boyd wrote:
Hi John,
Are there any updates to this thread. I have not seen any further
response from Digium, in the last 45- 50 days, and therefore am
wondering if there will be any
2008/6/11 John Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
More on this in the follow-up reply to
this soon to come.
Hi John,
I'm still looking forward to reading this followup.
Digium's new business approach is most concerning to me - both in my role as
occasional contributor, and as a Digium distributor,
Discussion
asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 7:03:26 AM GMT -06:00 Guadalajara / Mexico City
/ Monterrey
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk developers and
consultants
2008/6/11 John Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
More on this in the follow-up reply
/ Mexico
City / Monterrey
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk developers and
consultants
2008/6/11 John Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
More on this in the follow-up reply to
this soon to come.
Hi John,
I'm still looking forward to reading this followup
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Davies
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 5:03 AM
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk developers and
consultants
2008/6/11 John Todd
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 00:26 -0400, Andrew Joakimsen wrote:
The stuff on the Digium site is like an EULA... most of the provisions
are not enforceable.
Just as I can get a BMW engine, put it in a Yugo and sell it in the
free market as a Yugo with a BMW engine you can do the same with
context it's used in.
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 12:00 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 02:47:14 +0200
From: Trixter aka Bret McDanel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk developers
and consultants
To: Commercial and Business
First I want to say that I think this is distracting to the real issue,
however, since John Todd has responded in an official capacity regarding
this issue, I think some diversion can be had without losing sight of
everything else.
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 08:40 -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk
developers
and consultants
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain
First I want to say that I think this is distracting
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 14:20 -0400, Jason Garland wrote:
I usually try to avoid SIP providers using Asterisk for the same
reasons. A good indication they are using Asterisk is if they offer
IAX service. I usually take a look at a few SIP packets to check the
User-Agent or Server headers
/Lanham_Act
On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 00:24 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:06:51 -0700
From: Miles Scruggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk
developers and consultants
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Brett -
Sorry for the delay on this - many of us were off-site yesterday,
and today has been catch-up while writing snippets of this throughout
the day.
You've brought up some good points, but I think they are issues of
perception instead of issues of intention. While Digium does keep
On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 19:53 -0500, John Todd wrote:
Brett -
Sorry for the delay on this - many of us were off-site yesterday,
and today has been catch-up while writing snippets of this throughout
the day.
You've brought up some good points, but I think they are issues of
The stuff on the Digium site is like an EULA... most of the provisions
are not enforceable.
Just as I can get a BMW engine, put it in a Yugo and sell it in the
free market as a Yugo with a BMW engine you can do the same with
Asterisk. Look into fair use if you create a product that works with
I understand you can use it if you are a partner, reseller or dCAP?
Thanks.
___
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
Do all of those swear allegiance to selling only Digium hardware?
This is the only thing that prevents me from being partner or
reseller. I am not sure about dCAP, but I am not swearing to only
sell Digium equipment. 6.4.3 of appendix A.
I suppose one could setup multiple business entities to
2008/6/9 Steve Totaro [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Do all of those swear allegiance to selling only Digium hardware?
This is the only thing that prevents me from being partner or
reseller. I am not sure about dCAP, but I am not swearing to only
sell Digium equipment. 6.4.3 of appendix A.
I agree and
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 11:19 +0100, Gavin Henry wrote:
I understand you can use it if you are a partner, reseller or dCAP?
the policy doesnt say that, so unless you have it somewhere in writing
that says it overrides that policy, its not allowed unfortunately.
For resellers they are doing
software don't have
these problems.)
Jacob Suter
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Trixter aka Bret
McDanel
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 7:47 PM
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Subject: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 14:20 -0400, Jason Garland wrote:
I usually try to avoid SIP providers using Asterisk for the same
reasons. A good indication they are using Asterisk is if they offer
IAX service. I usually take a look at a few SIP packets to check the
User-Agent or Server headers before
, 09 Jun 2008 02:47:14 +0200
From: Trixter aka Bret McDanel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk developers
and consultants
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 17:14 -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
I'm not sure that a trademark on Asterisk prevents anyone else from
saying their product works with Asterisk, or is compatible with
Asterisk. The trademark prevents anyone else from calling their own SW
PBX by the name
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 18:16 -0400, David Boyd wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 17:14 -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
However, I'm pretty sure that this has been resolved in the courts.
Even though it's HW, not SW, the 100% IBM Compatible PC clone
marketing in the 1980s comes to mind. The
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Jacob Suter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I'll go back to monitoring this list for SIP provider info. I just wish
the ones that weren't asterisk-based would advertise the fact (I'm running
into bugs with asterisk-based providers, mostly due to not accepting/using
I could be wrong but iirc IBM lost their trademark to public domain in
the same manner as xerox did.
On Jun 9, 2008, at 3:46 PM, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
We're not talking about the (engineering) design, we're talking about
the trademark. I'm pretty sure that IBM protects the IBM trademark
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 18:46 -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 18:16 -0400, David Boyd wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 17:14 -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
However, I'm pretty sure that this has been resolved in the courts.
Even though it's HW, not SW, the 100% IBM
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 18:16 -0400, David Boyd wrote:
I thought that IBM released the design of the IBM pc to the world, and
they never tried to control the expansion. If true then the argument
doesn't support the use of Asterisk in the Fair manner that you
stated.
IBM didnt, compaq spent
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 18:46 -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
We're not talking about the (engineering) design, we're talking about
the trademark. I'm pretty sure that IBM protects the IBM trademark
viciously wherever possible.
really that only serves as a distraction, whether or not IBM
I am writing this letter to Digium and all those that use or develop
software for Asterisk. Asterisk is released under a dual license, the
one I will focus on is the GPL license.
Digium maintains a trademark on the word Asterisk, along with other
words. The trademark policy they have forbids
35 matches
Mail list logo
