Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Update on Uruguay "Linux" Trademark Situation 154

Posted by Hemos from the looking-a-little-better dept.
Recently, we carried a story about the attempt by a pair of Linux resellers in Uruguayan to trademark "Linux". This article seems to have generated a lot of attention towards the two gentlemen, who have since posted an Open Letter with their response. It seems that the UYLUG and the two men in question are having a disagreement of ownership, and use of the trademark. At this time, the situation is one that the Uruguyan Trademark office will need to decide who will receive the trademark.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Update on Uruguyan Attempt to Trademark "Linux" More

Update on Uruguyan Attempt to Trademark "Linux"

Comments Filter:

  • A disagreement of ownership?... (Score:4)

    by [marathon] ( 132823 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @07:00PM (#1384386) Homepage
    Shouldn't we form some sort of movement that goes around and registers trademarks for Linux to Linus in every country in the world?


  • Is it just me, or is that Open Letter they wrote a bit wordy and confusing?

    Connah
  • Mostly because it's unneccessary, and costly. Besides the cost issue, I doubt that any governments out there are going to keep people from selling (or giving away) distributions of linux. My only worry is that Network Solutions would screw up and move some linux-related domain if someone produced one of these trademarks.
  • In case these guys are rewarded the Linux trademark in Uruguay, I say the good people of Slashdot come up with some similar name suggestions to help the UYLUG out.

    Second thought, let's not. This is Slashdot afterall, else Linux may forever be known as Loonix or (worse yet) Gnulix in Uruguay.
  • Not speaking english as a first language does that effect on people. At least they made the effort. I admire them for that, considering the lousy french I possess after years of training.
  • Hehe...Yeah, I'm not picking at them though. I guess I could see where it would be difficult.

    Connah

  • Dude, it's URUGUAY!!

    I'm growing very tired of the incompetence of the /. crew. If you have any pride in your work, please, PLEASE get the spelling straight!!

  • gist (Score:5)

    by kemokid ( 122655 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @07:21PM (#1384399)
    BTW, I loved the M&M breeding story.

    Okay, from what I can gather, this company trademarked Linux *defensively*, and they further accuse some of the directors on UYLUG's board of acting in a manner inconsistent with being a true user group. If this is the case, it seems to me that they should promise to transfer the trademark to a certain Torvalds of recent fame. This would guarantee that anyone is able to use it, including this company AND the user group, as well as others.

    kemokid
  • In case these guys are rewarded the Linux trademark in Uruguay, I say the good people of Slashdot come up with some similar name suggestions to help the UYLUG out.In case these guys are rewarded the Linux trademark in Uruguay, I say the good people of Slashdot come up with some similar name suggestions to help the UYLUG out.

    And what is your rationale for assuming that the User's Group is the "good guy" and the company is the "bad guy" in this situation?

    mp

  • I'm confused. How can any trademark system all one to trademark a generic term? Linux is not a single piece of software. It's a loosley knit collection of pieces - a kernel source file here, an X server there - any of which is replaceable.

    That's like trademarking the term "door". It's a generic term. No problem trademarking "AlphaBuster Door", and no problem trademarking "Foobar-Ni Linux", but you can't just trademark a generic term!

    Stuff from the article that's badly writter or wrong:

    In August 1999 when we start our company activities, we present ourselves the followin problem: What will happen if one person or organization try to register the name "LINUX" as a trademark?

    Well, looks like you just found out.

    Lamentablement, posterior facts demostrate us that we weren't wrong.

    Posterior facts? Are you referring to the fact that your behavior can be well correlated to that of a posterior?

  • I find it a shame that the post I am replying to (and my post, for that matter) are not on topic of this thread. This really was a very amusing story, and I think it's kind of a shame that it will be (rightly) moderated down because of its topic. I kind of wish that there were an archive of random amusing stories posted to Slashdot. Perhaps Mr. Malda might implement this at some later date; if so, I would be quite happy to see this post there.
  • Both LinuxTECH and the UYLUG have expressed, through their conversation in open letters, their interest in protecting the Linux name. However, LinuxTECH does not recognize that Linus Torvalds is the rightful owner. I present to you a quote from the UYLUG's page:

    UYLUG is aware of and recognizes that the trademark LINUX belongs to Linus Torvalds an the Linux community. We are making all the contacts and legal actions to defend this position.

    I think that about sums it up.
  • Having just finished reading both documents in Spanish and English (and even Babelfish), it seems that it can be hard to tell the saints from the sinners sometimes.

    On the one hand, if what the Uruquayan Linux group is saying is true, it ends up looking like the two men in question are essentially trying to corner and control the Linux distribution market in that country.

    The response seems to be that the UY LUG has leading members who are intent on doing the same thing (and have filed for the trademark in more than one class themselves) that are the type of people who would do the same thing, given the chance.

    On the surface, I think we would all tend to favor the users group, but having dealt with monopolistic UG's in the past, my personal opinion is to reserve judgement (and flames) until we have more information.

    I have emailed, (and suggest /. readers do likewise) the LinuxTech (Uruquay) site mgmt. with a simple English request that the folks who have made the application publicly discuss what they will do with it, and let the UG respond before we all come down in harsh judgment on one side or the other.

  • But completly fail to consider those of the community: It is indefensible to say "I stole it first because everbody else was going to steal it"

    That said, trademarking Linux in my opinion, is like trying to trademark the word "car" or "water". There are many manufacturers of cars and even more water bottlers. Imagine if Toyota tried to trademark the word car?

    Linux now appears in enough different varieties and is produced by so many companies that the term "Linux" cannot rightly belong to anyone. Linux can also arguably be defined as describing much more than simply an OS. GNU/Linux is in fact a movement, it is a phenomenon that cannot belong to anyone.
  • Linux refers to the kernel itself, and GNU/Linux or a Linux Distribution refers to a collection of software along with the kernel. Linux is trademarked by Linus Torvalds.
  • Someone, somewhere, in the M&M Mars Corporation thinks you are the biggest freak of them all. I am sooooo jealous!
  • Does that mean that Linus can sue all companies that have the word "Linux" in their name for violating hit trademark?
  • Aren't there rules about what you can trademark? I thought there were restrictions on trademarks - you can't trademark common words or concepts (like one-click shopping), only things that you can prove are significantly and identifiably distinct to your company/usage? I guess these must vary country to country. I tend to doubt though that any trademark office will give out a trademark of such a common word.. and if it does, is there not a process to allow the repealing of that? This whole story sounds to me like a pack of idiots fighting over something that's only going to be taken away from them anyway. Since both groups are claiming to have the true interests of the linux community at heart, I'm sure they will turn the trademark over to Linus once they have secured it (if they do) rather than risk the ire of slashdotters everywhere ;) B.
  • Aren't there rules about what you can trademark? I thought there were restrictions on trademarks - you can't trademark common words or concepts (like one-click shopping), only things that you can prove are significantly and identifiably distinct to your company/usage?

    I guess these must vary country to country.

    I tend to doubt though that any trademark office will give out a trademark of such a common word.. and if it does, is there not a process to allow the repealing of that?

    This whole story sounds to me like a pack of idiots fighting over something that's only going to be taken away from them anyway.

    Since both groups are claiming to have the true interests of the linux community at heart, I'm sure they will turn the trademark over to Linus once they have secured it (if they do) rather than risk the ire of slashdotters everywhere ;)

    B.
    (Gah, damn HTML formatting)
  • This is taken from bOING bOING (the electronic version), and was published there quite a while ago.
  • "Linux now appears in enough different varieties and is produced by so many companies that the term "Linux" cannot rightly belong to anyone."

    Actually that's not true. Look at other examples like Kleenex, its a trademarked term, but is now used in common language. But someone still owns the trademark to the word kleenex, hence why other companies advertise their products as "facial tissues".

  • The interesting parts. (Score:5)

    by Inoshiro ( 71693 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @07:42PM (#1384415) Homepage
    The letter is pretty interesting, if you can read around the Babelfished munging of some of the translation on the English side. Here's my summary of the important paragraphs:

    This letter is published as a responce because the company felt the users' group misrepresented them a bit, and (purposely or not) didn't reveal some key pieces of information.

    They asked themselves (when they formed their business) what would happen if someone came along and registered "Linux" with the local trademark office. This is because they are not sure what would happen if they went into business with their products, and someone came along and registered the name. Think of that pathetic fellow who tried to blackmail RedHat, et all, through trademarking Linux in the US.

    They couldn't think of a good solution to their problem. However, they were aware that the board of a local users' group had members which tended ot look out for their own person interests over the integrity of the group. They were afraid that the LUG might go and secure rights as a lever to control Linux trade in the country.

    They decided that they must act in defence of their own work, and trademark it before they did (kinda like the US vs Soviet nuclear arms race -- premptive strike tactics). They releaise that this might be misinterpreted by some as a hostile act.

    In hindsight, they think that they were right to do it because they did discover a pending trademark application for the "Linux" name in several areas (Classes 9 (computers, hardware, etc), 35 (publicity) and 42 (various, including computer services))

    At the time the LUG did not know about the company's registration, and so could their motives are suspect -- especially considering the blanket coverage they picked. The LUG became aware of the company registration, and tried to cut a deal with the company. Once the company said they wouldn't negociate with them (because the LUG wanted to retain the rights in all mentioned areas), they publicised the situation on the Internet.

    The next industrial bulliten will show the company's information about the ULUG's "behind the scenes" manipulation to be true.

    Their lawyers will respond by defending their claim.

    -- End summary --

    I know from dealing with people involved in hobbyist groups (Fidonet) that sometimes the hobbists will abuse their power. I think that both sides have valid concerns. Clearly what the situation needs is a trustable, acceptable third party.. I'm thinking Linus Torvalds, for obvious reasons :-)
    ---

  • .oO0Oo.
  • What a GOOD idea! Goes along with the post up above, about somebody going to every country and (R)ing the (TM) in Linus' name.

    The most fair outcome for everybody in Uruguay would be if both parties agree to pay half the cost each, and submit the paperwork to register the TM in Linus' name.

    As I understand it, Linus owns the TM and will let basically anybody use it. Is there a FAQ somewhere where Linus states his position on the "Linux" (TM) trademark? I did a Dejasearch (TM?) and didn't find anything definitive.

    It sounds to me like this is all some personal vendetta thing between the guys in the company and some other guys in the LUG (Who it sounds like also have some sort of commercial enterprise).

    The company's problem seems to be that they think if they DON'T get the TM in Uruguay, the Users' group will get it, and then stop the company from using the word "Linux" (TM) in its name. If the company is worried that the LUG is going to block it, the company should register it to Linus who will NOT block them or anybody else.

    Then The LUG and the company and anybody else in Uruguay can use the word "Linux" (TM) and everybody will be happy.

    Unless of course what the company really wanted was the EXCLUSIVE use of the (TM) in Uruguay, in which case they should be taken out and shot.


    -James

  • No (Score:1)

    by spaceorb ( 125782 )
    I know little about trademark law, or the conditions in which Linus Torvalds allows people to use the Linux trademark, but it is probably something like "You may use the Linux trademark so long as you give credit to the owner." Your welcome to investigate, the Linux trademark filed at the USPTO is availible here. [uspto.gov]
  • Ooo, ooo, the *funny* offtopic posts get moderated up! I'll have to remember that one!

    What happens to a funny on-topic post? Does it get marked as "Troll"?

    Let's test the Slashdot moderation system once again...



    Free Software Foundation sued over trademark infringement

    GNU Soft, a Houston-based toy company has filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against the Free Software Foundation. GNU Soft has been in the business of manufacturing plush animal toys for over thirty years, predating the FSF by over a decade. The company recently filed for a trademark of the word GNU and a logo containing a gnu covering all types of soft wares.

    The company claimed that the free software foundation has been undermining their business by diluting the trademark and associating it with the word 'free'. With the recent rise in publicity of free software, GNU Soft started getting hundreds of phone calls every day requesting information about free software, including several calls from Fortune 500 companies. ``Our telephone operators just can't deal with this flood of inquiries any more'' said the company spokesman Michael Fitcherston, ``Also, the rumors that we are giving our toys away free has been causing concern among our shareholders. We were forced to sue in order to stay in business''.

    The spokesman refused to comment when asked about the rumors of a possible acquisition of GNU Soft by Microsoft. However, he stated firmly that ``There has been no pressure at any point from Microsoft to start a lawsuit. Even though all our computerized soft toys use Windows operating systems, our relationship with Microsoft has always been trouble-free''.

    One of the company's major products to date is Lennox the penguin. The spokesman also refused to comment on whether a lawsuit against Linus
    Torvalds, the creator of the Linux operating system was in planning.

    In a related story, the Free Software Foundation is reputedly looking into buying Micro Soft, a manufacturer of plush miniature cars, for their trademarks.





    Oh, and why give credit where credit is due anymore, either? Originality is the art of concealing your sources... And do I have to post it 8,000,000 times, too, just to be like Mr. M&M AC?

    Oh, okay, it's from Segfault, and I'm only posting it once. You can thank me now.
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • If you read the story, you would have seen the words:

    Please note that our native language is spanish, and we try to keep intact the content of the original reply in spanish.

    so before you flame them about a mis-picked word try learning another language and translating a document into it, and lets see how well you do. And I think what they meant was "Lamentably, previous deeds..."

  • I'm sorry, dude. It's hard to protect your identity when all those other AC's steal your name like that.

    I guess I'm not impressed because I got it in an e-mail before, but I remember it being pretty funny stuff. Of course, I also haven't been impressed with slashdot "moderation" for a while, but... well, too many monkeys typing for too long spoil the broth, or something. :)
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • Spelling flames suck, but I'm not particularly interested in watching my language go (further) down the crapper.
  • Doesn't it have any power out there wherever Uruguay is? Why not?

  • Well, if a company released an OS they were calling "FooBar Linux", Linus could most certainly sue, if and only if the OS wasn't really Linux.

    i.e. M$ could not release a version of WinNt called "Linux 2000" or something like that, although they could certainly release a distribution of Linux called "Linux 2000". In fact, I hope they do. :)
  • ...is that "defensively" trademarking the term "Linux" in every nation/state/economy/whatever under the sun just reinforces a dangerous legal precedent for owning trademarks on general terms which are already in wide use.

    I feel like maybe our lack of confidence in our trademark systems is becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy.
  • Because Linus only holds the trademark in the United States. I could register the trademark "foobar" for my business in the US, but there really isn't anything to stop a company in any other country from doing the same thing, unless I go around and register "foobar" with every trademark office in the world.

  • Re:Can someone answer... (Score:3)

    by / ( 33804 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @09:32PM (#1384439)
    You can trademark common words for specificly enumerated types of applications: like the prototypical Apple computers and Apple records. The problem with trademarking common words is that they're harder to defend than invented words, and they're harder to acquire if they've previously been applied in a field. Witness Microsoft's trademark of "Plug N Play", rather than "Plug and Play", since "plug and play" as a phrase has been used regarding computers for quite some time. And btw, the one-click shopping issue concerns patents rather than trademarks (which are both distinguished from copyrights).

    If you want to repeal a stupid trademark, then just get a bunch of your friends together and start misusing the trademark -- if it is not properly defended and if it becomes part of people's normal vocabulary (and if there is no alternative word to choose) then it ceases to be a trademark -- just look at the proliferation of the word "spam" as applied to junk mail or news postings.
  • Well, I guess I'm not perfect, but at least I try! Hummus and CmdrBurrito don't seem to give a damn...but I guess that's their prerogative.

    I really wouldn't mind a mistake here or there, but /. delivers mistakes in just about every article. And for a site with so much exposure, that's a damn shame, because it makes us all look bad.

    BTW, it's spelled "sentence".

    And yes, I am beating myself over the head over that post. Thanks for pointing it out.
  • Both LinuxTECH and the UYLUG have expressed, through their conversation in open letters, their interest in protecting the Linux name. However, LinuxTECH does not recognize that Linus Torvalds is the rightful owner.

    Do you have some evidence for this claim?

    Just because one of the parties calls itself the "linux user's group" is no reason to assume that it is the truthful party. It seems you have not read the response letter, so let me quote from it:

    Being aware of the integration of the Board of Directors of UYLUG, knowners of the personal interest of some of its members - not compatible with the integrity of a user's group - and the expertise in trademarks of other member, we handle the posiblity that they will try to secure exclusive rights to the Linux trademark to prevent that other persons or companies beyond their control to trade with the Linux trademark in Uruguay.

    What's your basis for determining that this paragraph is a lie and the one you quoted from the users' group is the truthful one?

    I believe that the reality is that we have walked into a family squabble -- and choosing sides is foolish. I have been in several user groups where political infighting has resulted in or been the result of a particular faction using the group for its own particular ends. Sometimes, those ends are driving certain individuals out of the group. Other times, they are simply controlling the resources of the group.

    How do you know that in fact, the claims of the business are not true? It may well be that some people in the user group are attempting to control who will be allowed to use the "linux" name in Uruguay.

    The smart move in this situation would be to wait and see what develops.

    mp

  • All you people are too late!
  • Saludos mi amigo. Noventa y cinco por ciento de los utilizadores de Slashdot no pueden entender el lenguaje español. Si usted quisiera que los utilizadores aquí entendieran su mensaje, sugeriría que usted fije en inglés. Babelfish [http] del intento la vez próxima.
  • What would happen if these guys did trdaemark Linux in Uruguay? INAL, but I believe that companies that do not do business within Uruguay would be free to use the Linux name. But even if they feared the wrath of the Uruguan (sp?) court and trademark system, and decided not to use the word "Linux" in their products, what would be lost?

    For the major players, very little. Brands such as "RedHat", "VA", and "Caldera" are indetifiable without the "Linux" appendage. In fact part of the reason these companies have been so sucessful is that they have powerful brand names backed up by good product(s). Highly evoloved tech companies should rely on more than just the latest craze to survive. In a world without the word "Linux", would we somehow not know what "RedHat" meant? Of course not. And a new term for the OS would crop up Slashdot discussions the next day anyway... PenguinOS for example.

    Now, of course we'd all be pissed if the Linux name was taken, but we need to realize that there are more important battles to be fought, like for our rights on line, for free speech.

    A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet...

    Linux by any other name would still be as well coded...

  • Aspirin was a trademark of the Bayer company but they lost the trademark in the USA when aspirin became a generic term for acetylsalicylic acid.
  • I have emailed, (and suggest /. readers do likewise) the LinuxTech (Uruquay) site mgmt. with a simple English request that the folks who have made the application publicly discuss what they will do with it, and let the UG respond before we all come down in harsh judgment on one side or the other.

    A couple of days ago I asked Linuxtech the same question. Haven't heard from them yet.

    The official reaction of the UYLUG on the LinuxTECH document can allready be found on Slashdot. You can find it here [slashdot.org]. UYLUG also posted another link [slashdot.org] on Slashdot regarding the case. The link leads to a document [linux.org.uy] in which they quite clearly explain their position on the matter. It containes a timeline of their actions (they also want to register Tux as a trademark) They claim to be willing to transfer the trademark to Linus and have told him so in an e-mail allready. (BTW the top part is in Spanish, at the bottom there is an English version. I have also read the babelfished version of the Spanish part and it seems to be alike.)

    One of the directors of LinuxTECH is also on one of the committees of the UYLUG and is one of the founding members of the UYLUG. They don't seem to be on speaking terms anymore. I think this whole Uruguayan stuff is quite messy, with more involved then just a dispute over trademarks. It seems strange for a founding member to abandon the group he helped to start and to go against the general idea of what a LUG should do. The only way we can find if either intentions are true (and they might very well be!) is to see what they will do when they have been awarded the trademarks in the respective categories.

    For the record: I am not from Uruguay and I am not involved with the UYLUG in anyway.

  • I must express my sympathy for this Primer guy. You can't compare his occasional mistakes (or mine, or yours) to the mistakes of someone who claims to be an editor. Language is the basic tool of a journalist, it can't be neglected.

    A small misspelling (although this one was on the name of a country) here and there is something we have to live with, unfortunately. This is not the problem. The problem is this attitude of regarding proper use of the language as a secondary concern. Check out /. FAQ and you will see they take their bad spelling/grammar with a bit of pride. The mistakes are so many that they hurt even *my* eyes, for I'm brazilian and my English is barely operational. If I had to choose between correctness and content, I would pick the latter, but these are *not* mutually exclusive, they are complementary, for bad language (I mean "rules") can distort the best intentions.

    Else, let Homer Simpson do the editing...


    -------------------------

  • It looks to me like we have not enough information about the question, both the LUG and the two mens are carrying on opposite theory about the question and none of us can know who's saying the truth.

    Anyway, IMHO, a private company should not own the trademark for Linux, the most intelligent things could be to give the trademark to the LUG, better, or some other organization but according to the company the right of using the name in their business, i don't know if this is legally acceptable, but i understands the concern of the two mens who could loose lot's of money and investiments if what they're saying about the LUG is right, after all LUGS has no official recognition and, as far as we know, it could be managed by people with strong ecnomic interst in the control of the trademark Linux.

    What do you think about a consortium leaded by Linus and devoted to the protection of the Linux trademark and other similar stuff ?

    ZCool

    Insert Windows NT 4 CD-Rom into the floppy disk drive

    Sorry for the bad english
  • Wouldn't the problem be solved if whoever gets the trademark assigns it to Linus Torvalds so all these issues of control disappear?

    Kastor
  • Notice that everybody argues the same way: we wanted to protect the trademark, so we filed first. Listen, guys: insted to protect the trademark by grabbing the right to it (and who trusts you?) you should make people realise who is the real holdero of the copyright and that all attempts of registration in other countries have failed. So will yours. --------------------- "Gdy przy sniadaniu ginekolog /obleje kawa twoj nekrolog" -- Jan Riesenkampf
  • This is funny... a backward country that has more fun killing it's people and having a milita that could be squashed easily by any other country in the world, actually has a trademark office? and they obviously cant see beyond their office desks. But then they just got the light bulb last wednesday. Let the country make fools of themselves....

    This is sad... because the government there is a stupid as the government here things like this happen.. the rest of the world is going to ignore the trademark, the linux users will ignore it and life will continue...

  • I wince at the fact that you, a person with english as a second language, actually used the right word at the end of the second sentence, when far too often I've seen the word "complimentary" used in the place of "complementary" (or compliment in place of complement) by people with english as a first language.

    Incidentally, please note that all spelling flames are required to have at least one spelling errer.

    --
  • s/sentence/paragraph/, and I hate freudian slips.

    --
  • I am a member of the BALUG (BALUG Argentina Linux User Group), and i know personally at least one of the members of the UYLUG. According to him, they want to have the linux trademark, to give it away to Linus. What else could they do with it anyway?


    Chalito

  • I think slashdot is making the same mistakes of all media, publishing posts without any verification. We never will know the truth with this type of articles.

    RetroCool
  • We will continue to see this type of activity until we have an internationally recognized and sanctioned worldwide patent and trademark authority. With the development of global communications, economics, industry, and trade the need for such an authority grows every day. Each of us as users and as potential entrepreneurs (sp?) has a stake in this. The time has come for people to voice an interest in a global patentent and trademark authority to government officials from the state level on up. The logical governing body at present would be the World Trade Organization.
    --
    "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong."
  • Even so, I still don't understand what "posterior facts" are.
  • I thought this M&M thing was funny too, so I showed it to my girlfriend. She found it strangely exciting, getting this funny look in her eye, and then becoming all fidgety. For a minute, with her eyes half closed I thought I was about to be the beneficiary of an upwelling of lust, but she shoved me away, grabbed the bag of M&Ms, and slipped out the door...

    So, anyway, left to my own devices I figured I'd try a few experiments of my own. Always intrigued by miscegenation, I bought a few different packets of candy from the machine in my dorm and held a little mixer on the desk. But even with the lights turned low, there wasn't a lot of action... I decided to help things along by bringing my own peculiar oral skills to the table, except when I was done eating each one, quickly achieving satiety, it was in no state to continue participating. Finally, when it came down to the last two pieces, I encouraged one final union, between a kit-kat and an M&M, and side by side before me they entered into a strange sexual congress that I can only describe to you as: slash-dot.

  • For the major players, very little. Brands such as "RedHat", "VA", and "Caldera" are indetifiable without the "Linux" appendage. In fact part of the reason these companies have been so sucessful is that they have powerful brand names backed up by good product(s). Highly evoloved tech companies should rely on more than just the latest craze to survive. In a world without the word "Linux", would we somehow not know what "RedHat" meant? Of course not. And a new term for the OS would crop up Slashdot discussions the next day anyway... PenguinOS for example.

    This is nothing new... just ask the Anheuser-Busch people about trying to sell "Budweiser" in Europe. They had to rebrand it as "Bud"...

    1. The beer isn't actually made in Budweis, so the name "Budweiser" creates confusion in a way Europeans are particularly picky about (contrast "Champagne" with "sparkling wine/methode Champagnoise").
    2. There's already a beer brewed in Budweis that has (had? they may have settled this for $$ since then) the rights (locally) to call itself "Budweiser". Amusingly, American Budweiser calls itself the "King of Beers" while the Czech Budweiser is the "Beer of Kings".

    It's not as if varying the names of things from country to country is all that unusual anyway. Do you think GM could sell the Chevy Nova as a "no va" (doesn't go) in Spanish-speaking countries? North American carmakers routinely give their products different names just between the US and Canadian markets (ever seen a Pontiac Acadian?).

    So, really, what's the big deal? Linux, Unix, GNU/Linux, etc. Call it what you need to to get the job done locally. To make a really bad pun: An OS by any other name would smell as sweet.







    This is my opinion and my opinion only. Incidentally, IANAL.

  • Re:A disagreement of ownership?... (Score:3)

    by 1010011010 ( 53039 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2000 @06:09AM (#1384475) Homepage
    How about RedHat, VALinux and other IPOed, cash-flush Linux companies forming a trade association that registers and protects the Linux trademark, and defends GPL software against license violations?

    It would be in their best interest, both business-wise and for PR reasons.
  • I often think the same myself but then there would be a single point of failure, so to speak.
    If this granted amazons damn silly patent, it would be an all or nothing situation worldwide.
    I doubt we could get much consensus on the rules/definition this Authority would use.
  • But there is a difference: Here at /., we have the ability to comment on the articles, to correct Rob and the others. In an ordinary news paper, or worse, TV program, there is no such way, or at least the ability to answer is restricted and all posts are reviewed by the staff of the news paper before they are publushed.
  • Most likely came from http://www-csag.cs.uiuc.edu/ individual/pakin/complaint [uiuc.edu]. And to the original poster:

    Having just been exposed to Mr. Anonymous Coward, Esq.'s flippant antihumanist treatises, I ponder how best to express my disgust at Mr. Coward's total lack of sensitivity and reasoning. If you disagree with my claim that Mr. Coward's double standards have reached a depth of degeneracy that was virtually unknown in the past, then read no further. Rest assured, it's time for him to stop his systematic assault on religious freedom. Innocent children have been brainwashed by his grotty undertakings. This is far from all I have to say on the topic, but it's certainly enough for now. Just remember one thing: Mr. Anonymous Coward, Esq. has yet to acknowledge this.
  • What happened is maybe an understandable situation. The same reason that moved those two guys to try trademarking "Linux" moved the UYLUG: fear of anybody taking advantage of the trademark office's ignorance about the subject. This may likely happen again somewhere else in the world, so someone should be actively doing something. I find rather difficult for Torvalds to do it, but, what about a third party association that goes around the world raising funds with local user groups to get the trademark in each place that seems to be needed? Well, just my five cents... Saludos, Alex
  • Lol ... yeah, THATS what we need. Another unaccountable worldwide governmental organization. Good thinking! Hey, maybe the Juan Samaranch would be interested in heading it up.

    Along those same lines, maybe we need worldwide organizations to do all the other things that we're too busy to take care of ourselves!
  • hehehe.. M&Ms..

    I think that, besides the _fact_ that both the LUG and the company want to register "Linux", the whole thing is like 'specially made' for slashdot.

    After the "real news" (LinuxTECH trying to register 'linux') the LUG posts this open letter [linuxstart.com] with some _really stupid_ arguments about how this company is evil (like "using the name of the well-known Swiss company Linuxtech" or "They freely used the word "Linux" in their company's name, "LinuxTECH". This of course allows them to enjoy the prestige that Linux holds in the business world"). That was not necessary.

    Then, the company replyes with another letter that starts "Please note that our native language is spanish" because of all the english readers.

    It's funny how both letters are formatted _exactly_ the same.

    I thnk all the trademark thing is an important matter, and we have to deal with it, but this particular case was handled wrong by both sides.. I think they are seeking for more than "a fair use of the Linux trademark".

    WOW.. Reply from 207.3.116.151: bytes=32 tome=50ms TDV=246 (207.3.116.151 = linux.com.uy)

    --

  • AFAIK, the name "Linux" is a trademark in Brazil (a country about 20 times bigger than Uruguay in area, population, and GNP) owned by Conectiva, a local portuguese language distro (www.conectiva.com.br for the portuguese readers)
  • While Linux is a very commonly heard term in the /. crowd, it simply isn't a generic term. 'Operating system' is a generic term. 'Linux' is a name of a particular type or "brand" of operating system.

    It may not seem to make sense to call Linux a brand name, since it isn't held by a company trying to leverage the name for market share. Despite this, 'Linux' is still a name of a specific product, not a generic type of product. 'Linux' refers specifically to an OS that is based on the kernel created by Linus Torvald, and which is licensed under his control as per our fine open source agreements. It does not refer to any OS of similar nature written by others. For example, if Sun started marketing Solaris as "Sun-brand Linux", I'm pretty sure you'd agree that such a name is trying to mislead the buying public. (Although, it would be quite a compliment I suppose.)

    The case to drive it all home - if MS started calling Win95 by the name "Microsoft-brand Linux", wouldn't you be up in arms? ;)

  • The last thing I want to see is IP rights falling into the hands of a NON-DEMOCRATIC committee run by corporate despots who have managed to exploit enough people to 'earn' their coveted rank.

    So far, this incident is of interest solely because someone might be trying to take advantage of the situation for their own gain. However, I do not see how this situation in any way indicates that the system is not working. LinuxTECH has registered a trademark in their company (or are they still in the process?), but this is in no way the final word on the matter. If LinuxTECH tried to exploit their apparent ownership of the TM, there's nothing stopping Linus (or a group acting on his permitted behalf) from taking LinuxTECH to court to prove he is the rightful owner of the TM in that country. (See my post [slashdot.org] on the previous thread for how this could work.)

    If you really want to argue that a global IP authority needs to be established, at least give that authority to the United Nations. They're formed of actual world leaders, not just a bunch of businessmen intent on getting as close as possible to a global monopoly.

  • The best example of name confusion was the "Free Willie" movie. In the UK it was like if the whale was named Dick...

    To get back on topic, The net is not local. National trademarks don't mean sh-t outside that country. They just mess things up.

    2.There's already a beer brewed in Budweis that has the rights (locally) to call itself "Budweiser".

    Plus the Czech Budweiser (Budvar) tastes like beer, not water :-)

  • Hi, I'm a member of UYLUG. I'm not a directive. I signed the first Open Letter. I was present in the formal group meeting which was held in order to discuss the TM issue, in early 1999. I voted for the proposal of registering 'Linux' and then transfering rights to Linus Torvalds. Many others like me voted for it. Nobody voted against it. I trust the board of directors, in that they _will_ transfer rights to Linus, as proposed. Maybe someone else doesn't. Just for the record. Thanks. I'm as proud of Uruguay as I'm proud of Linux. Uruguay is a free democratic country. The Uylug is a LUG, which is doing what is needed in order to be recognized legally as uruguayan non-profit organization. We propose to the group and then vote nearly every arising issue. Every Linux user is welcome at Uylug, to get their Linux boxes running, as anyone can check if he/she asks. I like /. Thanks again.
  • Is the formula open source?
    Your welcome to investigate, the "other" Linux® trademark filed at the USPTO is availible here. [uspto.gov]

Slashdot Top Deals

"Hello again, Peabody here..." -- Mister Peabody

Close