Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

SSC Trademark Threats vs LinuxGazette.net 162

Posted by CmdrTaco from the what-a-mess dept.
Zelligar writes "You may want to check into the brewing trademark issues between SSC/linuxgazette.com and the linuxgazette.net people - linuxgazette is a volunteer gazette, hosted by SSC for a while, and now SSC is taking it over - and threatening trademark litigation to boot! Here is one story and another on the subject."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SSC Trademark Threats vs LinuxGazette.net More

SSC Trademark Threats vs LinuxGazette.net

Comments Filter:

  • Don't worry (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:08AM (#7608313)
    Don't worry. SCO will sue SSC out of business. For one thing, it is involved with Linux. For another, it sounds too much like SCO anyway (both in name and action)

    There can only be ONE company that files frivolous lawsuits about Linux!!!!

  • Come on... (Score:3, Informative)

    by loucura! ( 247834 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:09AM (#7608318)
    They are required by law to proactively defend their trademark or they lose the protection. This story brings me to conclude that it must be a slow news day.

    • Trademark (Score:5, Interesting)

      by nuggz ( 69912 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:16AM (#7608360) Homepage
      Who owns the trademark?

      Is it a valid trademark?
      If the volunteer organization used the name linuxgazette before it was registered by SSC, it is likely not a valid trademark.

      I love to see litigation happy companies lose and come out behind.
      The Word Wresting Federation against the World Wildlife Fund was fun.

      • Re:Trademark (Score:2, Informative)

        by Evil Adrian ( 253301 )
        Except that the World Wildlife Fund was the litigation-happy one, and they won...

      • Re:Trademark (Score:3, Informative)

        by loucura! ( 247834 )
        SSC owns the trademark, the "volunteer organisation" is made up of people who used to contribute to the SSC/linuxgazette.com site, and got angry that they migrated to a CMS, so they split and took the name. That sort of hijacking is what trademark law is for.

        • Re:Trademark (Score:5, Informative)

          by RedHat Rocky ( 94208 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:28AM (#7608437)
          Perhaps you'd like to read their side of the story [lwn.net]?

        • Re:Trademark (Score:2, Flamebait)

          by Zeinfeld ( 263942 )
          SSC owns the trademark, the "volunteer organisation" is made up of people who used to contribute to the SSC/linuxgazette.com site, and got angry that they migrated to a CMS, so they split and took the name. That sort of hijacking is what trademark law is for.

          Exactly why should we care about this dispute?

          If a bunch of folk get tweaked about using a content management system - a twenty year old technology used on the web for ten years...

          Basically the group has forked and the dissident group had some li

          • Re:Trademark (Score:4, Informative)

            by bizcoach ( 640439 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @01:15PM (#7609968) Homepage
            Exactly why should we care about this dispute?

            Because it teaches to clarify matters of trademark ownership early on. Right when LG started establishing a close relationship with SSC they should have made a contract that clarifies the question of who owns the trademark in case the relationship becomes sour.

            As things are (without contract, and with no payment having been received by the original creators of LinuxGazette in exchange for trademark rights), I think that the linuxgazette.net folks are probably not guilty of any trademark violation when using the LinuxGazette name.

            However, IANAL, and would be interested in reading comments from a lawyer on this matter.

        • Re:Trademark (Score:5, Informative)

          by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @11:24AM (#7608801) Homepage
          cince when does a company automatically get to claim ownership of something that others created?

          SSC is trying to hijack the ownership of Linux Gazette. It was never EVER sold to them. they graciousally offered to host them.

          SSC are being the asshats. they dont OWN Linux Gazette, they never OWNED linux Gazette, and nothing can change that fact.

          SSC lost me when they made the Linux Journal into the ZiffDavis type crap it is today. the LJ used to be of the quality of Linux Format, a british Linux mag that is the best you can get today.

          this crud they are trying to pull only amplifies what is wrong in SSC.

        • Re:Trademark (Score:4, Informative)

          by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @11:35AM (#7608905) Homepage
          If you had checked the USPTO website, SSC registered the trademark on October 28th, 2003, or after this dispute had begun. The Whois has the domain registration in 1997 by SSC after the Linux Gazette had been publishing for 2 years.

          Issues have been copyright John Fisk, SSC, and the Linux Gazette group. All copyrights are also retained by the original authors.

          Actual ownership of the trademark will be a hairy one to sort out.

        • Re:Trademark (Score:3, Informative)

          by JoeBuck ( 7947 )

          SSC does not own the trademark. They are asserting that they own the trademark, but this won't wash, because the people who started Linux Gazette used that name before they had any relationship with SSC, and they never assigned that name to SSC. The person with the right to the trademark is the one that first used it.

      • Re:Trademark (Score:5, Informative)

        by urulokion ( 597607 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @11:04AM (#7608674)
        I smell something very fishy going on. And I don't the Linux Gazette volunterrs. I wondered who had the trademark to "Linux Gazette". I ran the TM search and guess what I found.
        Word Mark LINUX GAZETTE
        Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Publication of Journal. FIRST USE: 19950701. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19960801
        Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
        Serial Number 78319880
        Filing Date October 28, 2003
        Current Filing Basis 1A
        Original Filing Basis 1A
        Owner (APPLICANT) Specialized Systems Consultants, Inc. CORPORATION 2208 NW Market St Suite 407 Seattle WASHINGTON 98107
        Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
        Register PRINCIPAL
        Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

        There is a trademark registered to SSC. But the application date was Oct 28,2003. The very same day that Rick Moen notified Phil Hugh that they were moving the magazine accord to the LWN article [lwn.net].

        SSC is playing dirty pool not the other around.

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:29AM (#7608443)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re:Come on... (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        It's not like I can trademark "Pepsi News".

        You sure could. As long as you don't sell any products that are close to what PepsiCo sells. Also, Linux hasn't been enforcing his trademark, so he couldn't win a suit at this point. Which is a good thing. He just had to trademark it to keep others from doing that. Also, marks just need to be clearly distinct to consumers. I think LinuxGazette.com isn't confusing with Linux the kernel, so it's valid for that reason as well.

    • Re:Come on... (Score:5, Informative)

      by _KiTA_ ( 241027 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @12:35PM (#7609509) Homepage
      The problem is, they applied for the trademark on October 28th, 2003. This, of course, is the same exact day that the other people decided to split off from them. And this isn't "a few contributors", this is *all the staff*. Basically the only people left at Linuxgazette.com are SSC's people -- everyone who actually worked on Linuxgazette has left.

      So yeah. Something's fishy here. Not sure what, but the impression I got (from the article and the emails posted to LWN) was that:

      SSC basically offered them hosting space for a long period of time.

      Having done so, SSC has basically started taking over recently, changing LinuxGazette.com from a newspaper type website to a blog/slashdot type "Content Managment System" site. This includes them taking older articles that were published under the OPL an removing the copyright notice, modifying articles at will without telling anyone (or even asking), and stuff like that. The only reason anyone noticed they were modifying articles was the original staff kept mirrors of the issues elsewhere, which were unedited.

      The founders/authors weren't happy with this, so they decided rather than fight it, they'd just split off to "the other Linuxgazette" and poiltely request that SSC rename Linuxgazette.com and give them back their domain name.

      SSC decides that hey, since they were hosting LinuxGazette.com, they now own LinuxGazette.*, and trademarks the name in reply to them deciding to leave.

      Am I close? Anyone got any corrections to offer?

  • How Stupid (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    You can't just decide you don't like a site and try to make a copycat site using the same name and logo. That's like saying that I don't like Coke so I am going to make my own soda and call it Coke and use the same logos. Trademark laws exist to protect the customer as much as the company. By protecting the images and name of a company the consumer can be assured that what they are buying is the original. The same should hold true for something free and open.

    • Re:How Stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

      by sapone ( 152094 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:20AM (#7608396)
      But what if it was not a copycat site but a site made by some of the people who who ran the first site?

      This is about a volunteer project, and the projecst has split. Who is to say which of the two groups can keep the name and which cannot?

      Sebastian
      • The solution is obvious, AOL CD duel at dawn
        Walk ten paces from each other, turn and hurl AOL CDs at each other, the first one to decapitate the other is the winner

        (Well its one use for the CDs)
  • I've read both aritcles and I'm still confused. What the heck is the point and why should I care? Its not the least bit interesting. If we could mod article submissions i would moderate this one -1 boring. If there was such a choice. I've submitted many articles that were much more interesting only to have them rejected. I guess this must be a slow news day.

    • Re:Does anyone care? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Here is the executive summary:

      linuxgazette.com changed the way their site works by using a content management system. Some frequent contributors decided they didn't like it so they registered linuxgazette.net and copied the logos and name to the new site. linuxgazette.com said that as long as that is the case they will not allow links to that site from theirs.

      This is a silly total non-issue.
    • NOTE: BOTH stories are from SSC's side.

      Neither reflects the other side of the coin.
    • I've read both aritcles and I'm still confused. What the heck is the point and why should I care?

      Brief summary (and I'm not informed about this particular spat). LinuxGazette was originally a newsletter that one guy decided to put out to "help people have a just a little more fun" with Linux. He reminded me a lot of Cliff Stoll -- folksy, nice, and very into just helping people out.

      As it happened, more and more volunteers started joining, and the LG became one of the early sources for good Linux inform

      • Re:Does anyone care? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by pantherace ( 165052 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @12:30PM (#7609451)
        As mentioned other places, the trademark was applied for the same day the linux gazette staff sent a letter to them telling them they were moving it.

        SSC never owned the LG, and they have been removing at least one copyright. Essentially they were providing hosting. I would compare this to something being hosted on sourceforge.net, and then when you tell sf that you are moving away because you don't like something which conflicts with your ideas about the project, sf registers a trademark and becomes a legal jerk.

        I seriously doubt the above (sourceforge) group would do that, but it appears to have happened with SSC.

    • I'm going to have to agree with those that modded my original post down. It wasn't "informative". It was the exact opposite of informative, a question. However, I'm not sure why it was modded flamebait that seems a little harsh. But what ever is neeeded to bring it back down is fine. The posters who responded to me, now those are informative posts. Mod them up, not me.

  • This sounds abit overblown (Score:5, Informative)

    by MooCows ( 718367 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:15AM (#7608356)
    Correct me if I'm wrong:

    Summary:

    1. Things changed at linuxgazette.com
    2. Some contributers didn't like it (neither do I), and started their own site.
    3. They were bright enough to use linuxgazette.net (of all places) for their new site. (even stealing the logo design)
    4. linuxgazette.com doesn't like it, and tells linuxgazette.net to start their own site if they want, but not with the linuxgazette name.
    5. linuxgazette.net doesn't agree, and the threats start to fly
    (6. Profit?)

    All very reasonable if you ask me .. what if SCO started using something like "L1nux" for their new OS eh? :P
    • All very reasonable if you ask me .. what if SCO started using something like "L1nux" for their new OS eh? :P

      Actually, it would be like Linus Torvalds suing you for calling your new kernel L1nux. SCO doesn't hold any trademark rights to the name "Linux."* Those belong to Linus.

      * Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.

    • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:45AM (#7608538)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re:This sounds abit overblown (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Either way, neither has a legitimate legal claim to the LinuxGazette name unless they've negotiated with Linus Torvalds who owns the Linux trademark

        No. Publications have a fair-use right to the trademarked name as long as they acknowledge the trademark. Trademarks are not general and they apply only to specific uses: the Linux trademark applies only to software. I could come out with a Linux brand dog food and not be infringing on the Linux software trademark.

        This is why Microsoft loses when it tries to
      • I have the feeling that Linux has become generic i.e. you can use it in any way you want.

        Furthermore, Linus registered Linux in Nice category 9, i.e. computer and scientific equipment, not publications.

        Linux Week is a registered trademark for a publication and they didn't have to license anything from Linus (you cannot register a trademark that contains another trademarked element on the basis of a license. Either your mark is distinctive or it is not. A license allows you to use a mark but not to create

    • There's more to it. Linuxgazette was not a creation of SSC, and it's not a 'dissident group' leaving. Linuxgazette was a volunteer organisation from the beginning, and SSC picked it up and hosted it after it had been around some time. Apparently their business got intermixed over that period, and now both SSC and the Linuxgazette staff think they own the name and design and so forth. The entire staff of Linuxgazette have left, and are continuing Linuxgazette as it's always been from a new location, while SS

    • All very reasonable if you ask me .. what if SCO started using something like "L1nux" for their new OS eh? :P

      Whoa -- that would be 50 1337!

    • Can't really tell but:

      it looks more like linuxgazette.com was hosted by ssc in some strange way. then ssc decided to radically change the way linuxgazette.com works: turning it into a blog public posting style site versus the existing editor-selected-articles published on a schedule system.

      the existing staff decided to move elsewhere and are using the .net temporarily, and expected SSC to hand over the .com. Meanwhile, SSC reposted their old articles on .com without author attribution and without copyrigh

    • Your summary is completely off, as it misses about four steps at the very beginning: first, a group of people started Linux Gazette. The publication took off, to the point where it generated more traffic than their original ISP would allow. They looked for a new site, and SSC offered to provide web hosting.

      What this means is that SSC's trademark application is invalid: you can't own a name you didn't coin and you didn't buy.

  • Forking a website? (Score:3, Informative)

    by scumdamn ( 82357 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:15AM (#7608358)
    Apparently a group of volunteers has decided to fork the Linux Gazzette website and didn't bother to change the name of it. This doesn't sound like a big draconian company taking over a volunteer publication and beginning to sue everyone in site. It's more of a proper use of trademark law to me.

    • Re:Forking a website? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nuggz ( 69912 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:41AM (#7608507) Homepage
      But according to Rick Moen. http://lwn.net/Articles/58065/

      LinuxGazette was founded by a group, it was hosted independantly for a short period of time.

      SSC provided hosting for many years and things got closer. They even paid for some writers.

      Now they are leaving, and taking their name with them.
      SSC thinks they own LinuxGazette, The volunteer group does not.

      I think it will be interesting to see how SSC proves they own the name.

      • Re:Forking a website? (Score:2, Informative)

        by Theatetus ( 521747 ) *

        I think it will be interesting to see how SSC proves they own the name.

        Well, this [uspto.gov] might be a good example of how they can prove they own the name. To quote the relevant part:

        Owner (APPLICANT) Specialized Systems Consultants, Inc. CORPORATION 2208 NW Market St Suite 407 Seattle WASHINGTON 98107

        I believe that Specialized Systems Consultants is the "SSC" in question.

        • True, SSC has applied for a trademark... on October 28, 2003. If this is after the friction began, then there is probably significant grounds for disputing the claim.
        • The registration date is October 28, 2003, even though Linus Gazette has been publishing since '95. Sounds like SSC decided to register the trademark only when they realized they had a problem. That registration might be succeptible to challenge.
          • Scarhill wrote:

            The registration date is October 28, 2003, even though Linus Gazette has been publishing since '95. Sounds like SSC decided to register the trademark only when they realized they had a problem. That registration might be succeptible to challenge.

            Or everyone could just let SSC, Inc. buy their $300 10-year (alleged) limited monopoly over a commercial brand identity (service mark), and just keep publishing Linux Gazette, because the one doesn't have a lot to do with the other.

            Our non-comm

        • That was done in 2003, not 1997 or whenever the LG started. One can't retroactively claim a trademark because they provided a few (big) favors to the original group of volunteers.

        • First, it says Owner(APPLICANT). That means that SSC is applying for the trademark. Second, notice the date: they didn't file for the trademark until after the staff announced that they were splitting.

  • I have recently opened a new site entitled, Slashdot, News for Geeks, Stuff That REALLY matters.

  • And now the other side of the coin.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RedHat Rocky ( 94208 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:19AM (#7608385)
    See http://linuxgazette.net/ for the traditional Linux Gazette. Ah, feel at home? Good.

    http://linuxgazette.net/issue96/reborn.html is part of their side of the story.

    Personally, I think the CMS site sucks and goes against the spirit of what Linux Gazette has been for years.

    • Please, everyone, if you run a Linux-related site, link to linuxgazette.net using the link text "Linux Gazette". That way, Google will direct people to the real Linux Gazette when they do searches.

      And yes, linuxgazette.net is the real Linux Gazette, as it consists of the original staff, publishing in the original form, and Linux Gazette existed before SSC offered to host it.

      Also, everyone, if you subscribe to Linux Journal, please notify SSC that you will cancel your subscription they day they bring a

    • --Cmdrtaco should be slapped for only posting SSC's side of the story (TWO links, yet!) in this article. This is a serious failure on /.'s part, as SSC is Clearly In The Wrong(TM.)

      --SSC should be BITCHslapped for trying to Bogart LG's body of work and the Whole Enchilada.

      --Everyone should update their bookmarks for the NEW LG:
      http://linuxgazette.net/index.html
      • Wolfrider wrote: SSC should be BITCHslapped for trying to Bogart LG's body of work and the Whole Enchilada.

        Feel welcome to bitchslap them.

        The other shoe has just dropped: SSC evidently feels its easier and cheaper to try to seize our domain than to file a trademark-infringement lawsuit, and they've just delivered a cease & desist letter to our domain registrar, citing their bogus trademark claim. We are of course not sitting down for that, and are drafting a response just in case SSC causes the

        • --Rick, I wish you guys all the best. Keep Taco and the rest of us informed any way you can. Linux Today (http://linuxtoday.com/) is also a good mouthpiece for the community, get the word out any way you can.

          --As a Slashdot reader with Excellent karma, I would *certainly* be against anyone trying to, say, DDOS the SSC and their related websites. I would also be publically against anyone who walked up to the SSC CEO and gave him the old pie-in-the-face gag. And anyone who started a letter-writing campai
        • Rick,

          After reading up on this on Slashdot and elsewhere, I have to say that I agree with your position. The fact that LG was in use before SSC became involved and was only registered as a trademark by SSC in October of this year, after the dispute started, shows duplicity on their part. That, coupled with the removal of copyright notices and the cease and desist letter to LG.net's registrar, makes me question the ethics of Linux Journal and its publisher.

          And maybe there is a more general lesson to be lear
  • If your legal department is on the offensive, you may need to lay off the marketing department.

  • Join the fun!!! (Score:3, Funny)

    by kinnell ( 607819 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:23AM (#7608414)
    If anyone wants to make this even more ridiculous, the linuxgazette.org domain name is still up for grabs. It would be funny to see what the forkers think of their site being forked.
    • Hand the domain name over to Linus. That would make things *really* interesting, as they cant sue him without risking their acess to the Linux trademark.
    • According to a GoDaddy WHOIS request:

      Domain ID:D92984598-LROR
      Domain Name:LINUXGAZETTE.ORG
      Created On:10-Dec-2002 10:34:35 UTC
      Last Updated On:24-Nov-2003 21:53:31
      UTCExpiration Date:10-Dec-2003 10:34:35 UTCSponsoring Registrar:R52-LROR
      Status:
      OKRegistrant
      ID:106 8 6362381480
      Registrant Name:Ultimate Search
      Registrant Street1:GPO Box 7862
      Registrant City:Central
      Registrant State/Province:HKRegistrant
      Postal Code:NARegistrant
      Country:HKRegistrant
      Email:dns @ultsearch.com
      Admin ID:10686362384500
      Admin Name:DNS Support
      Admin
  • Because I know from another story [slashdot.org] that Open Source people love them feuds. :)
  • The new site seems to be broken, you can't read the comments. The URLs (eg http://www.linuxgazette.com//131#131) go nowhere, and the expand/flatten/whatever the comment tree buttons do nothing (I reckon I'm in caching/cookie hell here but its exactly the same in both IE6 and Moz1.5). After figuring out that the site uses drupal [drupal.org] as its CMS, I realized the URLs should be, e.g.

    http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/view/134/131#13 1

    (for a comment on node 134). Looks like their URL rewriting is screwy. Anyway, hope

  • Rename it!! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by attobyte ( 20206 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @10:47AM (#7608549)
    Just come up with a better name announce it on Slashdot with the URL and all is good. SSC can rot in hell with the "Linux Gazette" name.
    • How about:

      Thee Linux Gazette

    • It looks like their facing an uphill legal battle using a questionable legal argument and few legal resources. It's might be better to walk away from this fight.

      They could still have a name that reflects their "Linux Gazette" history. A few names:

      * lg-news (re-using their lg-* naming convention)
      * Likeable Gazette
      * Loveable Gazelle
      * LG Gazette ("LG" stands for "LG Gazette"...)
  • Hmmmm....

    I'd say bad form from the forkers...

    They themselves say something along the lines of
    Mozaic begat Netscape which begat Mozilla...
    Corrrect, but as far as I remember, each change meant another logo and another name!!
    These guys, whatever there motives, simply ripped of the LinuxGazette name and artwork!
    Fork the Gazette? Sure! Keep the form factor? No problem! Tell people to switch allegiance? OK. But hey, call it Linux Newspaper or so and get your own logo!
    • One problem:

      The "forkers" are all of the original linuxgazette.com staff. They started the zine on their own dime, and after 2 years of running independent, SSC offered hosting. The gazette accepted this generous offer. Over the years, their business became intertwined. Now SSC claims to own the gazette. They are altering articles without the authors permission, and stripping the authors attribution and copyright notice and adding their own in its place. They are basically claiming copyright over eve
      • This sounds remarkably like what could happen if Slashdot ever decided to break away from their overlords.
        • The key difference there is that LG provides useful content, as opposed to /.. Also, I believe, that Rob and Jeff retained significant rights over the site when they initially sold to Andover.net.

        • This sounds remarkably like what could happen if Slashdot ever decided to break away from their overlords.

          Except that the folks that started Slashdot sold it, and there are contracts with specific compensation etc. Doesn't seem to be any of that for Linuxgazette - just a hosting company deciding they own what they're hosting, and registering a trademark after they realise their content has decided to leave rather than take orders they find offensive.

  • Summary & More info (Score:4, Informative)

    by __aazrub2255 ( 667014 ) * on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @11:24AM (#7608800)
    As posted below, more info is found here : http://lwn.net/Articles/58065/ [lwn.net]

    A lot of people aren't reading the links - here is a summary (again) :

    Linuxgazette.com - originally founded by a group of volunteers.

    SSC offered to host them, whee - works great.

    SSC took over editing at some point

    SSC changed the entire look/feel of the site, trashed the articles at will, and basically started locking out the original founders.

    the founders took their content to linuxgazette.net

    SSC, in the form of linuxgazette.com, is unhappy with the .net folks for continuing to use the name.

    IMHO - SSC should be ashamed for its bullying tactics. They should change the name of linuxgazette.com to something else, and give it back to the founders.
    • A lot of people aren't reading the links

      Maybe if you had posted, in your original post, links to both sides of the story things would actually make sense.
    • I agree. This is just making SSC look bad. Perhaps some of us could write them and persuade them to do the right thing and drop this?

      A fight like this is the last thing the community needs.

  • Even more info! (Score:3, Informative)

    by __aazrub2255 ( 667014 ) * on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @11:36AM (#7608908)
    The first link on the main article are the SSC guys' comments on this, and the second link is the linuxgazette founders (.net) replies to his comments.

    Here is a link to the linuxgazette.net with their side of the story :

    Linux Gazette, Reborn [linuxgazette.net]

    Here are two links to the linuxgazette.com forums - lots of discussion in here from both sides. Be warned that the .com folks WILL DELETE any posting with the linuxgazette.net address in it. The censor stuff as they see fit.

    Forum: Anyone prefer the old site? [linuxgazette.com]

    Forum: New Site! [linuxgazette.com]


    Note that if you browse around the forums, a lot of things are broken. To view the forums in expanded format, most recent postings at the top, add &mode=2 to the URL. For example:

    http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/view/104&mode =2
  • I just canceled my subscription to Linux Journal. It's a good magazine, but I'm sick of corporations acting like predators.

  • More more more (Score:2, Informative)

    by __aazrub2255 ( 667014 ) *
    Another LWN article [lwn.net]

    History of this problem [linuxgazette.net]
  • This is the same Linux Journal that can not get my subscription to me. I have emailed them, but I get no response. I have like 18 months left on my sub, but the just ignore me.

    What has happened to them? They used to be great!

  • what greedy bastards (Score:3)

    by CAIMLAS ( 41445 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @12:03PM (#7609182)
    Why is it that everyone that has previously supported the linux community seems to becoming complete asshats, and are trying to "take over" the efforts of a hard-working community for their own profit? Just because something is "free" does not mean that you can steal it and call it your own. Copyright still applies. What rookies.

    SCO, now LinuxGazette, and I don't know how many others. What clowns.

  • Internet Host claiming Internet Publication? (Score:4, Funny)

    by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @12:18PM (#7609332) Homepage
    Is this the case I am reading about?

    It seems that the heart of the creative effort was at first merely hosted by SSC. But then SSC made contributions of its own. Does making contributions constitute ownership? If so, what portion of ownership is warranted? Even if they can own "part" of the trademark, how can they justify an assertion of wholely owning something they did not create from the beginning?

    Clearly there is more than meets the eye, but I feel there is essentially a common clash between commercial desires and those of serving a community. This is commonly mirrored by many things such as the community internet being overtaken by commercial interests at every turn.

    I do not wish to "take sides" but I think it is important to note that since the presence of the Amish in Pennsylvania has helped to maintain the level of tourist income, I think it would be appropriate to hang signs advertising other business activities on all "public faces" of the Amish community. The Amish, after all, owe a good part of their success to their popularity as a tourist attraction. It is only fair that they "give back" by permitting advertisers to hand huge signs from the backs and sides of their carts, wagons, horses and barns. We do not feel that a sign reading, "This barn raised, in part, by Rice-a-Roni(tm) the San Francisco Treat!(tm)" would be at all out of place or out of the question.

  • SSC does not own the trademark (Score:3, Informative)

    by ClarkEvans ( 102211 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @12:39PM (#7609542) Homepage
    What SSC has is a *application* for a trademark, and no doubt this will be a disputed application. I suggest that the linuxgazette.NET people write the PTO and explain their side of the story before the trademark publishes... although, they probably have several months to do so. Trademarks take quite a bit of time. SSC's attempt to do a last-minute trademark file and then sue is not only mean spirited, but stupid.
    http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=do c&state=h prn5r.2.1


    Word Mark LINUX GAZETTE
    Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Publication of Journal. FIRST USE: 19950701. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19960801
    Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
    Serial Number 78319880
    Filing Date October 28, 2003
    Current Filing Basis 1A
    Original Filing Basis 1A
    Owner (APPLICANT) Specialized Systems Consultants, Inc. CORPORATION 2208 NW Market St Suite 407 Seattle WASHINGTON 98107
    Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
    Register PRINCIPAL
    Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
  • Ownership is important, but words convey meaning...

    Definitions:

    gazette: A newspaper; a printed sheet published periodically; esp., the official journal published by the British government, and containing legal and state notices.

    journal: A daily register of the ship's course and distance, the winds, weather, incidents of the voyage, etc. (c) (Legislature) The record of daily proceedings, kept by the clerk. (d) A newspaper published daily; by extension, a weekly newspaper or any periodical publication,
  • If the "renegade" bunch have to ditch the Linux Gazette name... I'll still follow them. The "new" SSC site is a nightmare. I have a major preference for the format on the linuxgazzette.net site... not only that, but they provide a palm friendly download of the current issue :) and the offline browsing version has always been a winner for me.
  • This achive of Issue # 8 seems to be unclear as to what happened when they started being hosted by Linux Journal.

    And finally, I want to offer a very special note of thanks to Phil Hughes at the Linux Journal. Phil is one of those infectiously nice guys that starts a casual conversation with you and after 2 hours, you're talking and laughing like life-long buddies. He's a great guy and I'm absolutely delighted that he and the folks at the Linux Journal have been willing to take over the care and feeding

  • SSC (Score:3, Informative)

    by fingusernames ( 695699 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @01:44PM (#7610248) Homepage
    I too am sick of the greed happening here. Fact: Linux Gazette was started by people other than SSC. SSC later hosted it. That doesn't mean they own it, doesn't mean they own the name. If SSC can show some legal documents saying otherwise, please show them. But I doubt they have such. Unfortunatly, some overly trusting person permitted SSC to register and own the linuxgazette.com domain name. Given the likely lack of other documentary evidence, that may count for something if this actually goes to court. Hopefully the fact that Linux Gazette existed prior to SSC's involvement will count for more.

    Another comment mentioned problems with their LJ subscription. I have subscribed since LJ was a thin little staple-bound magazine. I renewed my subscription yet again, a while ago, but the magazines stopped coming and I started getting bills. My AMEX card had been charged. So I figured no big deal, write email. I got a canned response stating that my payment had not been received. Responded that no, my card was charged, such and such date. No response. So I wrote a paper letter to their "customer service" address, with a copy of the AMEX statement and charge circled. No response. Sent another copy. No response. No magazines. Finally disputed it with AMEX, but too much time had passed.

    Final resort: looked up SSC's corporate records, sent a certified letter to their registered legal address, with copy of prior letter/statement copy, and said please either send my money back, or I will sue you. That got a a nearly INSTANT response, and a phone call. But no apology, just a request to discuss "this issue." They restarted my subscription.

    Given the poor customer service, the direction LJ has taken, and the behavior of SSC in this Linux Gazette issue, I won't be renewing my subscription either.

    Larry

  • SSC doesn't own the LG mark (Score:3, Interesting)

    by David Jao ( 2759 ) * <djao@dominia.org> on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @03:03PM (#7610939) Homepage
    I have no relationship with Linux Gazette other than once having contributed an article to LG (issue #35). My reading of the situation is that the trademark belongs to the originators of the magazine (i.e. the people who have recently left SSC), rather than the company that got involved almost a year later (i.e. SSC).

    I would be shocked and surprised if a hosting company could acquire trademark rights to a web site merely by hosting the web site. If this were so then Rackspace.com would find itself right now in possession of a very large number of trademark rights. Now I agree that SSC provided free hosting instead of paid hosting, but I fail to see how the fact that SSC provided its hosting for free changes anything.

    Likewise, although I realize SSC has contributed much effort to LG since SSC got involved with LG, I do not see these contributions establishing any trademark rights either. After all, *I* have contributed to LG before as well, and you don't see me going around asserting that I have trademark rights to LG.

    SSC should do the right thing and admit that it has no trademark rights to the name LG, relinquish the linuxgazette.com domain to the founders of LG, and publish their CMS under some other name. It is clear to me that LG is not a CMS, never has been a CMS, and that SSC is going to have a very difficult time arguing that the CMS is truer to the LG name than the rival publication.

    I should also point out that even if SSC somehow manages to win a legal case and keep the LG name, it will be blackballed by a sizable fraction (possibly even the majority) of the linux community, who, like me, view the founding volunteers of LG as the true keepers of the LG torch.

  • who *legally* has the right to the "Linux Gazette" name seems controversial at the very least. that being the case this is how i would approach resolving the situation.

    if i were the Answer Gang i would offer SSC the option of having the Linux Gazette name in exchange for a prominent announcement (on the front page of linuxgazette.com) that due to a disagreement some of the contributors have created a new zine at linuxwhatever.???.

    this would allow the readers to choose what to read.

    if SSC doesn't agree t

  • The new site sucks. The old site was better. I don't care what goes on behind the scenes for how content is managed, but the generated layout is crap. So it seems "CMS" means Content Mangling System.

    And look at that sponser ad ... "Microsoft Hosting Provider of the year ... Rackspace.Com" ... the place 20% of my spam comes from ... the place that totally ignores all spam complaints and lets spammers continue operating.

    So yeah, I can understand why the fork; SSC are doing things that really annoy me. B

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close