If trademarks were solely about finding something that no one else is using it
would make what is already a tremendously difficult exercise basically
impossible. We would all be making up nonsense words in order to get something
no one else used.
Trademarks infringement is defined as follows (NOLO):
“Trademark infringement is the unauthorized use of a trademark or service mark
(or a substantially similar mark) on competing or related goods and services.
The success of a lawsuit to stop the infringement turns on whether the
defendant's use causes a likelihood of confusion in the average consumer.”
The key here is that software-defined-networking (SDN) is sufficiently
different from OCR that there should be little or no confusion.
Is it perfect? No. Was it flagged as a concern by legal? Yes, it was.
Moderate risk. It was also one of the better names that is not completely
Tesseract, while widely used, has a small committer base and no foundation
behind it. So legal risk is small.
So, to be clear, the same trademark term can be used multiple times as long as
each usage is clearly distinct.
This is why we have 3 options. If ultimately LF/LFN is unhappy with this
option we will fall back to one of the others.
Vice President, Technology & Strategy, Cloud Software
+1 (415) 787-2253 [Google Voice]
ASSISTANT: Stephanie Concepcion, sconcepc...@juniper.net
On 2/13/18, 2:39 AM, "Dev on behalf of Valentine Sinitsyn"
<dev-boun...@lists.opencontrail.org on behalf of valentine.sinit...@gmail.com>
I'm concerned a bit about Tesserax being too close to Tesseract, which
is a well-known open-source OCR (and also a registered trademark owned
by someone else). Sounds very similar to Firebird (RDBMS) vs Firebird
(now Firefox) issue of the early 2000s.
My two cents,
On 13.02.2018 05:52, Gregory Elkinbard wrote:
> As many of you already know, we are required to change the name of the
> project as part of moving to the LF-N.
> We've started the ball rolling by coming up with a slate of names that
> we've preliminarily vetted with trademark counsel. That process has
> yielded three names that we are reasonably confident can pass the more
> stringent trademark test that is presently underway. Now, we need your
> We've set up a Google Form poll to gather community input on which of
> these three names might be most preferred by a plurality of members.
> Please follow the link belowhttps://goo.gl/forms/dj7xIlsXowVez4wI2and
> complete the poll per the instructions there. Voting is open through
> 08:00 UTC on Thursday, February 15. We'll announce the winner next week,
> pending the aforementioned trademark counsel review.
> Thanks for participating!
> Dev mailing list
Dev mailing list
Dev mailing list