OK, again based on what I have read in layman terms, if that is the meat
of their argument, then it looks like they are basing their claims on the
generic terms of "dilution" of their trademark. Which basically means
that they feel they have invested significant effort into developing the
name
ant.
The whole point is to avoid anything beyond the exchange of viewpoints
and hopefully an eventual compromise.)
ArgghhI've really got to get back to investigation all of the new
"features" in VisualAge and WebSphere 4.0
Jim LoVerde wrote:
OK, again based on what I have read in lay
any future trademarking is
irrelevant due to common law). Otherwise, they could submit an ITU
trademark registration for the new name prior to that decision.
Rick Leir wrote:
Jim LoVerde wrote:
I guess what I'm saying it that depending on the verbage of
the letter, it may still be possible
Actually, I found a site with quite a bit of information on Trademarks and
Copyrights (of course, I can't vouch for the accuracy). It is
http://www.nolo.com/encyclopedia/faqs/tc_ency.html.
With regard to commerce, it appears that there is no requirement to actually
sell a product using a
As infuriating as this is, I'd like to remind everyone to be cordial with
regard to any feedback to JD Edwards. It would seem to be allright to send
something along the lines of I am unhappy with your decision to pursue
trademark litigation with the Java Development Environment over the JDE
