> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lynn Fredricks
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 12:36 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Ogf-l] Forgotten Blank
>
>
> > Maybe. I've heard this often, but never seen any citations on it.
> >
> I think you just need to do some searching on this (dig far enough on
Apple's
> site and you'll likely find some sort of statement of resolution). Ive
read this
> many times in Apple related books. Also, some problems recently since
Apple is
> getting somewhat more involved in the music industry (ie Apple iTunes
software
> for ripping mp3s and licensing a major music database). It isnt just urban
> folklore.
Thanks. But I didn't really expect it was folklore. Just suspected it was a
story that might have changed in the telling. A list member sent me a link
that discusses the case; and in fact, the suit happened only when Apple
Computer started sneaking into the music business. In other words, Apple
Records perceived no infringement as long as the mark was not confusible due
to being in a separate field, but got annoyed when the mark started to cross
over into their field. That pretty much fits the point I was making.
Martin L. Shoemaker
Martin L. Shoemaker Consulting, Software Design and UML Training
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.MartinLShoemaker.com
http://www.UMLBootCamp.com
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
