On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 09:32:06AM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:50:21PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
Pepsico doesn't ask the Coca-Cola Company's permission to publish claims
that its sugar-water is better tasting than is
Rick Moen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
The nature of our disagreement seems to be in our differing
assessments of what's going to cause confusion in the minds of the
customers.
I'd call that progress -- because _all of the prior writings_ from the
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Rick Moen wrote:
Pepsico doesn't ask the Coca-Cola Company's permission to publish
claims that its sugar-water is better tasting than is Coca-Cola.
That ought to be a big, fat clue, but far too many people have been
successfully conned and don't think about the
Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 08:25:30AM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
As usual for trademark claims, the complainer greatly overstates the
rights actually available to trademark owners[1]. Briefly stated,
establishing a valid trademark entitles you to
Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:50:21PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
Trademark law never requires any such thing.
When you are distributing a product which is similar, but not identical, to
the product of the trademark holder, using the trademark to
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:50:21PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
Perhaps you don't understand that it's our position that Debian and its
derivers need to have the freedom to make modifications to the browser
without being obligated to either get prior approval from Mozilla Corp. for
each
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Rick Moen wrote:
Pepsico doesn't ask the Coca-Cola Company's permission to publish claims
that its sugar-water is better tasting than is Coca-Cola. That ought to
be a big, fat clue, but far too many people have been successfully
conned and don't think about the
, but already implemented, decision. That's why the Subject
header was Trademark scope (just for the record).
If I've had no greater effect than to call people's attention to the
fundamental error of thinking one must secure a trademark owner's
permission to use a brand name or identifying marks
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007, Rick Moen wrote:
I was not suggesting that was the case. Read what I _said_, please.
I was pointing out one huge clue, from the realm of everyday
commerce, that should have alerted Debian users to the fact that,
no, it is not true that one must ask a trademark owner's
- Forwarded message from rick -
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 19:15:11 -0700
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: :-/
Quoting Trent W. Buck ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
See http://bugs.debian.org/354622 for the full story. Sorry I didn't
include that link before, I was lazy.
As usual for trademark
Rick,
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 08:25:30AM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
See http://bugs.debian.org/354622 for the full story. Sorry I didn't
include that link before, I was lazy.
As usual for trademark claims, the complainer greatly overstates the
rights actually available to trademark
11 matches
Mail list logo
