On Mon, 23 May 2005, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
They want their trademarks stripped from modified
code that is essentially different in intent and purpose from the
original code.
Well, that's fine; we don't want to use their trademarks for things which
aren't designed to work with their
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the other hand, any trademark license would permit us to use their
trademark, which we could not do otherwise.
This is a misunderstanding of trademark.
It is always legal to describe the driver as being a driver by author
intended for use with trademark, because that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The company in question is willing to negotiate terms for a trademark
license that is agreeable to all parties.
Obviously any advertising or
guarantee restrictions are unacceptable to us.
Well, no; some such restrictions are acceptable. We accept the required NO
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
technology. Unfortunately, the company's trademark guide makes the
following restrictions on the use of the trademark:
(1) the product (i.e. the Linux kernel) must display the trademark on
the splash screen (or in the About... box);
(2) the trademark must appear in all
Nicholas Jefferson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What terms could we accept?
Who cares? Why not rename it and avoid the whole debate, if the
maintainer thinks their terms might be unacceptable?
Can we accept the restriction that any modification to the product
must, at a minimum, first strip the
On 5/19/05, Nicholas Jefferson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The company in question is willing to negotiate terms for a trademark
license that is agreeable to all parties. Obviously any advertising or
guarantee restrictions are unacceptable to us. Unlimited use of the
trademark is unacceptable to
Isn't it always legal to use a trademark to refer to the product in question?
If you have a driver for a piece of hardware that has the trademarked name X,
it should be legal to name it driver for X. (Of course, what is legal and
what keeps you from getting sued aren't nececssarily the same.)
On 5/19/05, Ken Arromdee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't it always legal to use a trademark to refer to the product in question?
If you have a driver for a piece of hardware that has the trademarked name X,
it should be legal to name it driver for X. (Of course, what is legal and
what keeps
I'm not at all sure that all advertising or guarantee restrictions are
unacceptable to us.
Yes ;-)
It was a poor choice of words on my part. I had intended that to mean
any advertising or guarantee restrictions of the kind outlined in my
original email (viz. trademarks on the splash screen and
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 09:48:25AM -0700, Ken Arromdee wrote:
Isn't it always legal to use a trademark to refer to the product in question?
If you have a driver for a piece of hardware that has the trademarked name X,
it should be legal to name it driver for X.
Yes, and there should be no need
Nicholas Jefferson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MJ Ray wrote:
Who cares? Why not rename it and avoid the whole debate, if the
maintainer thinks their terms might be unacceptable?
I think it would be helpful if the driver was named after the
technology. If the bluetooth driver was named harold
On 5/19/05, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 09:48:25AM -0700, Ken Arromdee wrote:
Isn't it always legal to use a trademark to refer to the product in
question?
If you have a driver for a piece of hardware that has the trademarked name
X,
it should be
12 matches
Mail list logo
