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:
>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
WAR
[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
intended for use with ", because that can't cause
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
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
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
> 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 an
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 k
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, 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 unacceptabl
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" and the trident
driver named "poseidon" it wo
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 t
[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
Hello.
Please accept my apologies if I am flogging a dead horse. I have ST*W
but I cannot find a definitive solution to this problem. I did find a
thread [1] on debian-legal from last year but it had more questions
than answers ;-)
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00236.html
I
14 matches
Mail list logo