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 T
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
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
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
>> wonde
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 h
iented Asterisk
> Discussion
> 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
al and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk
Discussion
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 we
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
d Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion"
>
> 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 Joh
and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion"
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
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
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 13:13 -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
> So long as the trademark law basis is understood, the proper focus of
> this thread is its consequences, both real and claimed, on Asterisk's
> use in the market.
Not really, my point is not to compare the trademark policy to th
AIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Open letter to digium, asterisk
> developers
> and consultants
> To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
>
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:
>
ed to foster that mutability and sharing of SW,
> > and the lack of patents on the SW (which did encumber the IBM PC) all
> > make an even stronger case for using the word "Asterisk" to compete with
> > Digium, as long as "Asterisk" is used to identify the Dig
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
>
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
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
> p
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
ed by law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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 c
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 b
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
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, compa
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
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" tradema
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/u
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 mi
h
> Digium, as long as "Asterisk" is used to identify the Digium product,
> and not misleadingly to identify the competing product. The trademark
> law takes into account that consumers understand English, and that the
> trademark is not some kind of hypnotic mind contr
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
erstand English, and that the
trademark is not some kind of hypnotic mind control that makes the
consumer buy no matter what 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 <[EMA
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 befo
ing
the ptime settings I'm using... Providers with good 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
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 "genui
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
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 ge
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:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/lis
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 m
37 matches
Mail list logo
