Andy Allan wrote:
> One thing needs to be said but doesn't seem to have been done
> properly here: Thanks Eric, that's very generous and much
> appreciated.
Hear hear.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/openmaps.org-tp24058116p24071442.html
Sent from the Op
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Eric Pritchett wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I recently donated openmaps.org to the Open Street Map Foundation.
> Everyone here is doing a great job with this project and I thought you
> could make better use of the domain.
One thing needs to be said but doesn't seem t
SteveC wrote:
> Next I'm going to wake up in the morning and you'll be outside my house,
> stalking me :-O
Not to worry, Saturday we started a project to have the Chamber of
Commerce in The Netherlands to be open 24x7 (like your patent office
they close at night).
I have already 1544818 person
On Jun 16, 2009, at 5:09 PM, SteveC wrote:
>
> On 16 Jun 2009, at 09:51, Stefan de Konink wrote:
>
>> Eric Pritchett wrote:
>>> I'm sure there are more advantages,
>>
>> There is; there is no trade mark on the name :)
>
> There isn't on openstreetmap either.
My understanding is that in the US a
On 16 Jun 2009, at 14:27, Stefan de Konink wrote:
> SteveC wrote:
>> Wrong again. The ™ was applied for the logo and the name
>
> So 'mark' means to me 'name' so OpenStreetMap was protected if it
> was granted, yes?
If, yes.
>> in the UK and Europe and the Foundation owns the whole problem, n
SteveC wrote:
> Wrong again. The ™ was applied for the logo and the name
So 'mark' means to me 'name' so OpenStreetMap was protected if it was
granted, yes?
> in the UK and
> Europe and the Foundation owns the whole problem, not me.
I thought you did 'something' in the foundation too ;)
> Pa
Hi,
Stefan de Konink wrote:
> Ok, the first time they refused it:
> http://www.ipo.gov.uk/domestic?domesticnum=2500154
>
> But since you tried again in two categories...
> http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ohim?ohimnum=E7366859
To the best of my knowledge, community trademarks are somewhat
transactional -
On 16 Jun 2009, at 14:15, Stefan de Konink wrote:
> SteveC wrote:
>> On 16 Jun 2009, at 09:51, Stefan de Konink wrote:
>>> Eric Pritchett wrote:
I'm sure there are more advantages,
>>>
>>> There is; there is no trade mark on the name :)
>> There isn't on openstreetmap either.
>
> Ok, the firs
SteveC wrote:
>
> On 16 Jun 2009, at 09:51, Stefan de Konink wrote:
>
>> Eric Pritchett wrote:
>>> I'm sure there are more advantages,
>>
>> There is; there is no trade mark on the name :)
>
> There isn't on openstreetmap either.
Ok, the first time they refused it:
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/domesti
On 16 Jun 2009, at 09:51, Stefan de Konink wrote:
> Eric Pritchett wrote:
>> I'm sure there are more advantages,
>
> There is; there is no trade mark on the name :)
There isn't on openstreetmap either.
Best
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstre
On Jun 16, 2009, at 12:30 PM, Eric Pritchett wrote:
>
> * There is often a misconception that OSM is a street focused
>project. I think this would be the most important. It's
>amazing what a name can do.
Sometimes you pick a name that has drawbacks. But everybody knows
w
2009/6/16 Jonas Krückel :
> Eric Pritchett schrieb:
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I recently donated openmaps.org to the Open Street Map Foundation.
>> Everyone here is doing a great job with this project and I thought you
>> could make better use of the domain. Having said that, the foundation
>> owns th
Eric Pritchett schrieb:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I recently donated openmaps.org to the Open Street Map Foundation.
> Everyone here is doing a great job with this project and I thought you
> could make better use of the domain. Having said that, the foundation
> owns the domain now and has full control
Eric Pritchett wrote:
> I'm sure there are more advantages,
There is; there is no trade mark on the name :)
Stefan
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
14 matches
Mail list logo
