I got few emails and I like to chare them with you all. I know all of you can read, yeah?
==
Date:
Sat, 27 Apr 2002 17:35:04 -0700
From:
"Karsten M. Self" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
"Pekka Heikkinen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Any reason you're insisting on responses
Mr. Heikkinen, I don't know who or what you are, but writing to me
off-list, getting my private answers to your rather impertinent
questions, and then posting my private mail back to the mailing list
with rude comments is clearly inexcusable.
Your posting those rude comments in doubled e-mails
all fun aside, I am serious about APOSSL and believe I have reacted
in a serious manner to all serious points made.
Serious means more than simply not joking. John Cowan pointed out a
major mistake in 1.0, which was totally the opposite of what you
intended. If you were serious you would
I don't know how many of you are aware of this, but I must have missed any
discussion that occured on it. It appears that our lack of action on an
Open Source trademark (bickering, bad communication, et. al) has created
a serious problem. A commercial organization (Navant Corporation) has filed
On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Ean R . Schuessler wrote:
I don't know how many of you are aware of this, but I must have missed any
discussion that occured on it. It appears that our lack of action on an
Open Source trademark (bickering, bad communication, et. al) has created
a serious problem
My understanding is that the validity of trademarks stands on an
organization's consistent use and regular defense of a term in the course
of commerce. The longer this mark stands formally unchallenged, the more
difficult it will become to unseat it. If this company develops products,
packaging,
On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Ean R . Schuessler wrote:
My understanding is that the validity of trademarks stands on an
organization's consistent use and regular defense of a term in the course
of commerce. The longer this mark stands formally unchallenged, the more
difficult it will become to
Ean R . Schuessler writes:
My understanding is that the validity of trademarks stands on an
organization's consistent use and regular defense of a term in the course
of commerce. The longer this mark stands formally unchallenged, the more
difficult it will become to unseat it. If this
On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Russell Nelson wrote:
Anyway, it's all a moot point since we've stopped defending "Open
Source". As one of the people on the front line of the trademark
defense, I can tell you that it was hopeless. If you have a different
opinion, I have to wonder what evidence you
David Johnson writes:
At one time there was talk about Open Source certification. Is this
still being considered? A trademark may not be possible, but a
certification would be the next best thing.
We had always planned on registering Open Source as a certification
mark. In fact, such an
10 matches
Mail list logo
