Hi John I think some EU countries (and Switzerland) also have this 5 years rule. But I'm not a professional lawyer. If anybody is, then I suggest that he could offer his services to the OSMF as a volunteer (e.g. for a 2nd opinion).
Yours, Stefan 2013/2/4 John F. Eldredge <j...@jfeldredge.com>: > Russ Nelson <nel...@crynwr.com> wrote: > >> Having read some more on this issue, I think the board has done the >> right thing. Apologies to anyone offended. >> >> Christopher Woods (IWD) writes: >> > On 02/02/2013 21:01, Aun Yngve Johnsen wrote: >> > > This discussion is way out of hand. You guys screaming for >> publishing the C+D, didn't you see the answer from SimonPoole? They >> have asked lawyers about advise in publishing it, as well as releasing >> more information about it. It is not a sign of weak leadership to ask >> for legal advise in a case that can be as hairy as trademark and >> copyright issues. >> >> > I'm extremely interested to see what in the notice specifies that >> the TM >> > holder believes that they can pursue and control usage when >> mentioned in >> > proximity of Google services. >> >> Again, without access to the C&D, is that in spite of having allowed >> generic usage of "geocode" for the last 12 years since their trademark >> was granted, they now claim that "geocode" in the context of a Google >> geocoding URL is a trademark infringement. As Chris says, risible. >> >> Deleting our links to the Google URL is the correct thing to do, >> because there is no way to link to that service without infringing >> their trademark (claim). >> >> My offer to create a non-infringing gateway stands. >> >> > Redacting or editing directly as a result of simply receiving a C&D >> is >> > not an ideal first step. Does OSM consider itself to be in breach of >> >> > something discussed in the C&D or that it has actually done >> something >> > wrong? I unequivocally believe the opposite to be true - and that >> > Geocode Inc. is misrepresenting the situation. >> >> The problem is that it's not OSM infringing the trademark. It's >> *Google*. > > If they have, indeed, allowed the generic use of the term "geocode" for 12 > years without challenging it, then I believe that, under US law, the term is > now legally classed as generic, and can be used by anyone. According to > <http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Trademark_infringement>, while there is no > Federal law explicitly stating a statute of limitations, one Federal court > decided that such cases were subject to the general five-year limit for > non-capital offenses under Title 18 of the US Code. Usually, the Federal > courts follow the precedents set by the most similar state case. > > -- > John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com > "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to > think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
