why would stating information that is publicly available about the existance of digium put me in a position to comment at all on google? Google and digium are two totally separate companies. I was only commenting on the 'transferred' comment that was made.
However on the single word 'asterisk' the following may illuminate the issue a bit. http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=d4l15a.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=asterisk&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query as you can see there are several 'asterisk' trademarks. You can also see 'asterisk appliance', 'digium asterisk world', 'asterisk now' and 'asteriskdialer' as related things. These were done in 2007. asteriskdialer is by someone other than digium. Other related might include "asteriskfree" which is owned by a bank, and 'web asterisk' which has nothing to do with telephony it seems. >From security doors, to wine, to music, to digium, to badminton racket strings, to some promo type company, to sun tanning beds, to orthopedic braces, to indoor tanning lotions. Some are abandoned, most arent, as you can see the single word "asterisk" is claimed by many. http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=d4l15a.3.10 marked as 'design PLUS words, letters and/or numbers' which includes the digium logo, asterisk by itself doesnt seem to count with that filing. http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=d4l15a.3.14 that one covers just the word 'asterisk' and is digium, registered 2005. Related things: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=d4l15a.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=iax&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query IAX is no longer registerd as a trademark http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=d4l15a.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=dundi&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query dundi shows that there never was a filing So it would be improper for anyone to use the (R) symbol in relation to those terms, since they arent registered. At best they could hope for a common law trademark (signified by the [tm]) but with iax that is more problematic given that it was registered by linux support services, and marked as abandoned. This may be related to the RFC draft for the protocol, since I think the abandoned stuff at one time said that it was due to the actions of the owner making it more generic, but I really dont recall at this point. On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 22:54 -0500, Rick wrote: > thx for the explaination, you are obviously in a better position to > explain why google words people are rejecting *asterisk adds when they > were prevously accepted... pleas expound... > -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel Belfast +44 28 9099 6461 US +1 516 687 5200 http://www.trxtel.com the phone company that pays you! _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
