German Law Firm claims Linux Trademark 205
Andreas Spengler writes "Apparently
a german lawfirm has filed a claim with the
german patent office for the trademark Linux
in Germany.
It's still unknown what their goal is.
" The article is in German, as one would expect. Babelfish the article.
No reason to panic (Score:1)
In German though, no harm can come from speaking a foreign language 8-)
Note: I am a trademark too, anyone who wants to buy me ?
Re:Human Translation -- Date (Score:1)
This should be Dec 09. 1999, Americans have their dates backwards
Channel-One publishes statement why they did it. (Score:1)
about the Linux trademark they filed in Germany.
It translates (in short words) into:
Translation (Score:2)
The Hamburg patent layers Hauck, Graalfs, Wehnert reserved the trade mark Linux at the german patent office. This was confirmed by a employee of the office by request of c't. Also, the "Deutsche Markenblatt" (german trade mark publication) lists the trade mark. In issue 36 dated 9.9.1999 (page 9919) Linux is listed under item 399 36 517.6 in the categorie Software.
What intentions trade mark holder Roy Boldt has in mind with the registration is not clear. The CEO of the Hamburger computer and bussines consulting office ChannelOne was inspite of several attempts not available on the phone. Whether this is a case of trade mark grabbing, or if Boldt is doing this in the interest of the community , like in the case of an Austrian Linux trade mark owner, is not clear at the moment.
Boldt can not be sure of the trade mark Linux. According to US law, the trade mark is owned by Linux-Father Linus Torvald. Torvalds had to fight for the trade mark in a US court.
The result of a comparable trial in germany is not clear. According to the german patent office, the trade mark law ends at the country borders. What the course of action here in germany will be remains to be seen. The time frame for a request for revision against the trade mark Linux ends on Dec 9 1999. Until then, everybody can claim a protection of the trade mark. The patent office is already armed for such a case. For such protective claims, the Form "W7202" is available on the World Wide Web. ---- my attempt, too lazy to login
Another wild stab (Score:2)
Like it or not, Linux has gained the attention of lawyers, executives, and beaurocrats and we will be forced to play their games. I imagine many inventors have gone through this before, and it will happen again.
Sucks, don't it.
Some Data (Score:2)
Adresse: Channel One GmbH
Gerhofstrasse 40
D-20354 Hamburg
Germany
Telefon: +49 40 35710650
Telefax: +49 40 35719786
NIC-Handle: RB53-RIPE
Domains: channelone.de , channel-one.de
They (http://www.channelone.de) actually recommend
Linux to their customers; their webserver seems to
be a Solaris, though.
Maybe one should phone this guy and ask what's
going on.
Another Translations (Score:1)
Anyway, combine this with babelfish and you have something which is almost understandable.
(freetranslations.com [freetranslation.com] german -> broken english)(end german -> broken english translation)
--
Re:Could some kindly soul... (Score:2)
Hey, I'm actually impressed with the old Babelfish. I could certainly follow it much better than I could in German, seeing as I don't read in German. And the translation was pretty fast, too. Kudos to AltaVista for that nice service.
As to the guy who posted the Pig Latin translation -- please tell me you wrote a program to do that. If not, then slowly step away from the computer with your hands where I can see them. Then go outside and enjoy life more.
they gave the patent to Linus in 1997 (Score:2)
in short: on 17.9.97 the TM owner met with Linux International, LIVE Linux-Verband, the owner of linux.de, moderated by Martin Schulte of GUUG e.V.
(German UNIX Users Group http://www.guug.de/)
They discussed the topic and at the end Mr. Humenberger gave the TM to Linus.
Mr. Humenberger said that he wanted to protect the Linux (TM) for the community.
Issue long resolved in Germany (Score:1)
Sebastian
The company's statement (translated) (Score:5)
"As can be read in today's Heise Newsticker, we are currently registering a trademark for the name Linux at the German Patent Office in Munich. That is correct. The articel has lead to high tides and now we are partly alleged of having the intention to steal the trademark or gain advantages in any way out of this step.
We certainly realize that we cannot claim the trademark Linux, because it represents the community. If at all, it is the right of Linus Torvalds to claim the trademark. Furthermore, we realize, that we, even if we succeeded, wouldn't make many friends in the Linux community.
We have however heard rumors about another company exactly trying to do this. First we couldn't believe that the trademark Linux wasn't registered in Germany. Meeting our lawyer, we however realized it was in fact true. Without much thinking we simply applied for the trademark to ensure that noone with commercial intention does before us.
We of Channel One are friends of the Linux movement and we are far from making profit from it that we don't earn ourselves. In fact we are currently working on our own Linux distribution targeted at the Office User that we want to distribute next year to further increase the number of Linux users. Our self-written intranet-software Intraware also runs on Linux.
On the domain linux.channel-one.de we will publish a comic series with the Linux penguin as a protagonist shortly, to provide some entertainment to the Linux community. And as you can see on our homepage www.channel-one.de, we are also helping to enlarge the Linux community by other means."
End of translation
I hope that I did a readable translation (the other way is easier, i.e. English->German).
Sebastian
Linux US trademark already in safe hands? (Score:1)
Even though this is legally enforceable in the USA only, they should be able to use the same approach in other countries if needed. Also, owning the trademark in the USA already may constitute a good argument in many jurisdictions. However, that may depend on the actual circumstances in each particular case and country.
Re:The company's statement (translated) (Score:1)
(JOKE!)
Re:folkenspiel defined (Score:1)
Daniel
Achtung! Allen Lookenspeepers... (Score:2)
Dieses Mark ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben! Ist easy ausragen den Users, lacheln den Publik, und mailbomben mit schmutzig-Worden. Ist nicht fuer gekaufen von den Dumbkopfen! Die rubbernecken sichtseern keepen das cotten-pickenen lawyers weg muss; relaxen und den Marketvergrossung watchen.
Daniel
Not Gumby, but pokey.org (Score:1)
Of course, that the owner was merely 14 or so when the lawyers struck made Prema Toy Company look stupid. They looked a little less stupid when the creator of Gumby found out the lawyers were hassling a kid and made them apologize.
Of course, this still didn't save pokey.com, which was owned by someone with a last name along the lines of "Pokanzer"... Maybe if he was 14 he'd still have his domain name too.
(Oh, yes, and pokey.org is still there....)
A sad thing (Score:3)
Here's my human translation (Score:5)
The Hamburg patent lawyers Hauck, Graalfs, Wehnert have claimed the word "Linux" at the German patent office. This was acknowledged today by an employee of the 'Sozietat' upon a request from C'T. The German 'Markenblatt' (Listing of brand names) also lists the trademark. In edition number 36, published on 9.9.1999 (page 9919), Linux is listed under the document reference 399 36 517,6 in the category software.
Which aims trademark owner Roy Boldt has with the registration is unclear. The managing director of a Hamburg System House and the management consultation operation ChannelOne was unreachable by telephone today despite several attempts. Whether it concerns a new case of brand name snatching or perhaps an unselfish act, such as the one from an Austrian Linux trademark owner, remains unsure for the time being.
However Boldt cannot be sure of the name "Linux" just yet. According to US laws the trademarks have been property of Linux father Linus Torvalds since 1997. However, Torvalds had to take the matter to court to claim the rights for himself.
For now, the outcome of a comparable law case in Germany would be uncertain. According to information from the German patent office, trademark law is confined to the respective state borders. How things proceed in this country remains to be seen in the next weeks. On 9.12.99 the period for objections to the protection of the word "Linux" ends. Until then, everyone can make claim for a "relative obstacle to this word protection". The patent office is already prepared for such a case. The form designated "W7202" and meant for possible contenders has already been given a place on the Internet.
Disclaimer: I'm no lawyer, so I apologise for possible flaws in the technical terms.
Michiel
What we need whenever there are foreign articles (Score:3)
Also a solution similar to this would allow some that speaks German or someone that has translated babelfish to english can post their finished translation.
Isn't it amazing that the internet has few language bounds? (A bit off topic, but this is important)
----- Cool Linux Project of the Week! [xoom.com]
Coming soon... October 1st!
Give that lawyer a pie! (Score:2)
I feel the need to order a tasty cream pie delivered to that law firm.
Human Translation (Score:1)
Will "Linux" Soon No Longer Be Free?
Hamburg patent lawyers Hauck, Graalfs, and Wehnert have registered the word "Linux" with the German patent office. This was confirmed to c't today by an employee of the firm. Deutsche Markenblatt also lists the trademark -- In issue 36 of September 9, 1999 on page 9919, Linux is listed 399 36 517,6.
Which owner Roy Boldt plans to do with the trademark is unclear. The managing director of Hamburg Systemhauses and the Management of Consultation (?)at ChannelOne were not available by telephone despite repeated attempts to contact them. Whether this is another case of "trademark grabbing" or whether Boldt -- like the owner of the "Linux" trademark in Austria -- has unselfish motives, is unknown at this time.
However, Boldt may not yet be sure of his rights to the "Linux" name. According to U.S. law, the trademark, since 1997, has belonged to Linux creator Linus Torvalds. However, Torvalds himself only got the rights to the name after (a legal battle?)
The output of a similar legal case in Germany would be uncertain. According to the German patent law, trademark ownership ends at a country's borders. How it applies in this country will only be revealed in the coming weeks. On September 12, 1999, the protest period for the "Linux" trademark ends. Until then, anyone could make put forth a valid claim that it should be protected.
The patent office has allowances for such a case. The form "W7202" to file objections is already in place on the Internet.
Again, forgive me if I've completely screwed this up.
Re:Human Translation -- Date (Score:1)
Re:But aren't trademarks bad? (Score:1)
Veronica and Ajax are also a common name and a name from well-known literature, respectively, and as such any company claiming to "own" them deserves a good fight.
Gumby.org? I hadn't heard about it, but I'd have to side with the trademark owners on that one -- just as I would with Linus's ownership of "Linux."
There's a huge difference between someone owning a trademark on something they "made up" (like the words "Linux" and "Gumby") and someone else trying to usurp that word from its originator, knowing full well it isn't their own creation.
As far as these guys wanting to make money from the trademark -- no mind reading involved. Unless they intend to give it away, *by definition* they're in it for the money. That's why they're called 'trade' marks.
Sorry we are full... (Score:2)
The typical Russian is a commie.
The typical Jew is greedy.
...
Such a spirit IMHO doesn't match with the spirit of the people behind Linux.
--
The web address of that German Company... (Score:4)
www.channel-one.de [channel-one.de]
They have an email address info@channel-one.de [mailto]
and apparently feedback@channel-one.de [mailto] ( I found
the latter using a search engine).
Their web pages look relatively Linux friendly and
reasonable. So it might be worth to find out _why_
they trademarked Linux (only stupid or unfriendly?).
--
Re:Markengrabbing (Score:2)
Bruce
Hmm, there could be profit in this. (Score:1)
Or the words 'computer', 'software' or phrases like 'free beer'.
"Mark Grabbing": indeed! (Score:1)
Your German is just fine, Bruce :-).
(In case people didn't know: the Mark is also the German currency).
spam (Score:1)
On the reasonable side: I thought there was already a similar case in Germany - does anyone remember the details?
Lawyers ... Sigh ! (Score:1)
Why can't they put this silly game to a rest?
First in US, then Korea, and now in Germany.
Don't they understand that things like "Linux" belongs to EVERYBODY?
I mean, will they go and trademark the word "Earth", hoping that they would own the entire planet?
Geeeeesh !!
Re:Lawyers ... Sigh ! (Score:1)
Fine.
Next time I would like to see if my lawyer would follow my order and eat sh*t.
Hehehehehe
Re:Babelfish translation: (Score:1)
I read Markengrabbing as something like domain squatting, as one of the meanings of Mark is, auf English, 'brand'. I think markgrabbing would make a better english word for the practice, also.
Re:Umm... (Score:1)
Re:Australian trademark owner? (Score:1)
Here are a couple links (in German): http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/avr-02.09.97-
http://www.linux-verband.de/Linux-R/linux-r.htm
Re:Filing on behalf of whom? (Score:1)
Netcraft report (Score:1)
www.channel-one.de is running Apache/1.3.6 (Unix) mod_perl/1.19 ApacheJServ/1.0b5 mod_ssl/2.3.0 OpenSSL/0.9.3 on Solaris
Better translation (manual) (Score:4)
The Hamburg patent lawyers Hauck, Graalfs, Wehnert have registered the trademark "Linux" with the German patent office.
This was acknowledged today by a member of the law firm following an inquiry by c't. The trademark protection is also reported by the publication "Deutsches Markenblatt". Linux is listed in issue #36 from 9.9.1999 (page 9919) under the document reference 399 36 517,6 in the software category.
It is unclear for what reasons the trademark owner Roy Boldt registered the trademark. The CEO of the German management consulting company ChannelOne was not available for comment despite several attempts to reach him by telephone.
It is unclear at this time if this is a new case of trademark grabbing, or if Boldt wants to act unselfishly like an Austrian holder of a Linux trademark (Note of translator: the Austrian guy handed the trademark over to Linus).
However, Boldt can't be sure of the trademark rights of "Linux" just yet. According to US law, the trademark is owned by Linux-Father Linus Torvalds, who had to go to court to get the rights.
At this time, the outcome of a comparable case in Germany would be uncertain. According to the German patent office, trademark law ends at the respective country's borders.
The next couple of weeks will show how the saga continues. The period to file objections against the trademark registration of the word "Linux" runs until December 9, 1999. Up to that date everybody can claim a so-called "relatives Schutzhindernis" (Translator's note: basically, claiming prior use). The patent office is prepared to these claims. The form "W7202" to use for claiming objections is already available online.
Answers in numerology. (Score:4)
" In number 36 of 9.9.1999 (page 9919) Linux under the document reference 399 36 517,6 in the category software is listed."
Well, I think the significance of this is pretty obvious...
On the first line, we start with 36. 3+6 is nine, and 9*4 is 36. Then you have 2 nines, followed by a 1, and 3 more nines. That makes 5 nines...1 less than 4 nines! The second line is even more interesting. The first digit is '3' while the last is '6'...36 again! With another 36 in the middle! There are a total of 10 nines in the whole thing, and 1+0=1. The number of beginnings, unity, the antichrist, and cream cheese. Add all the digits in both lines, and you get 132. 1+3+2=6, which when you turn it upside-down looks kind of like a nine. You know what this means, don't you??!
Absolutely nothing.
Re:Babelfish translation: (Score:1)
--
This might not be malicious (Score:2)
I suppose the ideal thing would be for it to be given to Linus but some beneficient Linux-using lawyer looking after it and not causing any hassle is surely the next best thing.
Channel.One Mission Statement (Score:2)
Well, I will only reproduce parts of it so that they don't sue me for copyright infringement. Here comes the "fair use":
Our Philosophy: [which should mean "how we explain existence", but really is only a mission statement ...]
We wish to aid our customers during all phases of inter- and intra-net [note that the internet is first priority ...] projects. Our encompassing competence [note that they don't know how to operate the demoronizer, or, for that matter, their web page generator, so that their homepage is vanilla without frames; *and* they ignore blind people or lynx users] positions us as external advisers. Through a lively mindset of service and better service [sorry my fault, try translating "dienstleistungsgedanke" yourself then ...] we attempt to tie customers to us [oh, gee, that's confidence-inspiring ...]. During realisation of our projects we focus on the optimal synthesis of doability and technical avantgarde [= lots of JS, little use ...]
We offer an encompassing competence in all areas of internet technologies, with the synergistic effects are exhibited in better results and quicker reaction times.
Also, the company was founded by a single person in 1995, the guy employes 33 people. They have just entered digital TV (I kid you not, but it's probably not meant literally ...) and started the ISO 9000 process. Let's see whether they have documented how to deal with a zillion slashdot inquiries yet ...
Finally, the company that undoubtedly is going to utilise the OPEN word of the Linux world as a marketing gimmick asks for your mail reader (outlook or netscape) when you subscribe to their mailing list.
... sorry to rant
Re:Umm... (Score:1)
country.
We can always change the spelling
to Linoux, it would still sound the same.
But then as long as he owns the trademark where
it counts, meaning the US
Re:No... If you don't stand up they can legally ta (Score:1)
Trademarks have to be actively defended.
Markengrabbing (Score:2)
I love it! "Markengrabbing" seems a better description of the concept than any comparable english word. I don't know if this duality exists in German, but to this English-speaker, the double meaning (Mark as in money, mark as in trademark) is hilariously appropriate. After all, in this day and age, grabbing trademarks is a much more profitable activity (witness the domain-name gold rush) than grabbing money.
domain names versus trademarks (Score:1)
This law firm has REGISTERED or filed to register a trademark and is claiming it.
The argument on domain names has been that domain names should be separate from trademarks in the real world, especially if there is another reason for them (i.e. veronica.org = someone's name).
Any Publicity is Good Publicity (Score:1)
Re:But aren't trademarks bad? (Score:1)
ultimately though, in both cases it's felt that "it's wrong" to grab a name just so you can sell it to someone, or extort royalties from someone.
Re:UNIX? (Score:2)
Another reason for an open IP portfolio (Score:1)
Many people have strong opinions about this. But this is exactly the kind of event that we as a community should have an open patent and trademark portfolio. Linus should have something to say about this trademark claim though.
Bumping heads with people like this is inevitable. He just have to be lions and be brave and fight the good fight. There is no way around it.
Re:But aren't trademarks bad? (Score:2)
The owner of veronica.org, in particular, had a claim on the domain because it was the name of her daughter. The ".org" deisgnation meant that the site was a non-profit entity (i.e. a baby, which, for the most part, is a non-profit venture). Therefore, the owners of Archie comics could not claim that the website was masquerading as their trademarked Veronica character. Ajax is the name of a figure in Greek mythology, and likewise, a ".org" site is not claiming to be a company with the trademark Ajax(tm). Were either of these sites a parody or made allusion to the trademarked materials (i.e. a pron cartoon site that featured a Veronica character similar to the one in Archie comics) then you might understand the lawsuit. This wasn't the case in either of these two.
gumby.org is more questionable, since that's the name specifically created by someone for a fictional character. If the owner of the web site were using it in a way that "lessened the brand identity" of Gumby (whatever that may mean) then the action might be considered slightly more reasonable.
In this case, these people have trademarked the word Linux presumably (we're not sure) to force others to pay for the right to call something Linux. Linux is not a common German term, so its obvious that the individuals have intentionally trademarked a term that they knew was being used to describe a particular software product. If their aims are to extort money, then it's pretty obvious that they are in the wrong.
In cases where a company has previously trademarked a term (or has trademarked a term in good faith, not knowing that another is currently using it) then you might excuse them if they try to enforce their trademark. I believe something of this sort happened with the WindowMaker window manager, where the original name of the project was actually a trademark of a software firm. As I recall, that firm didn't really try to enforce the trademark, but rather the author of WindowMaker decided to change the name of the project.
Re:International Trademarks (Score:1)
Umm... (Score:1)
Someone have an answer to that?
Some clarifications (Score:2)
- Mister Humenberger has filed the trademark 'Linux' for Germany in 1993.
- He agreed to transfer his rights to Linus Torvalds in 1997 after an effortless try to get linux.de to acknowledge this rights. (see URL below)
- You can file a trademark again in Germany. However you will only succeed in defending it if you can proof that you used the mark before the original filing occurred in a commercial context. This seems very unlikely.
So why did they do it? Publicity stunt? Ignorance? I don't know. But their chances are next to none.The article referred to in the /. article has already been much critizised for being inaccurate and sensation-seeking.
Reference: Streit um Linux Warenzeichen beigelegt [linux-verband.de].
Don't agitate, wait for the facts (Score:2)
Previously, there have been individuals who abused their ownership of a Linux-related trademark, domain name, whatever, and there have been other people who donated it to the community.
As long as we don't know anything, let's just wait and see, ok? If Channel.One turns out to be evil, I am sure to take out my clue-stick and hit them.
Won't hold up in court (Score:1)
and widespread use. However it may be cheaper
to settle with the a_sh_l_ than to fight it in
the international courts.
Australian trademark owner? (Score:1)
any pointers to that story?
In any case, you'd think that there would be some sort of prohibition on trademarking a name that (a) you did not come up with, (b) was already in common use, and (c) described a product you did not create, produce or own.
If that's not the case, I'm gonna fly to Germany and start trademarking every steenkin' noun, proper or not, in the dictionary.
Re:you what ? (Score:1)
Re:Lawyers ... Sigh ! (Score:1)
When are people going to understand that behind every lawyer, there is some *non*-lawyer asking him to do whatever it is you're complaining about.
Some lawyer sues for $100million in a frivolous case? Well, who's his idiot client asking him to do so in the 1st place? A lawyer is only doing what someone asks him to do.
Re:Won't hold up in court (Score:1)
Like, IBM should be IBM and not somebody else, I agree. So we have to protect the identity. But maybe the problem is that the identity is arbitrary... "Int.Bus.Machines" is just so non specific.
In the old days, people made themselves unique by stating place of origin... like Jesus of Nazareth, or Leonardo da Vinci. So maybe: "Linux of Finland". Maybe a "brand name" should be legally defined to require inclusion of something inherently non copyable. I mean, it's a big planet, and the namespace for brands is just getting more cluttered.
Using physical location may be one answer, like in the EU now I believe they are rulling on food labelling: "English Butter" really does have to be made in England.
"Nobody on the planet knows why we are here"
Re: Trademarks and Space Colonization (Score:1)
>Can't wait until fifty years from now when there's a colony on the moon or something. Heck, I'd trademark Linux, Pepsi-Cola,
>the letter "X", and the number "3aF". No prior use on the moon would be great.
Well, under the 1979 UN Moon Treaty [marssociety.org] (applying to all bodies outside the Earth), individual nations retain sovereignty and legal jurisdiction over their vehicles and bases. Thus, an American colony would be governed by US law. At this point, a sovereign moon colony is not permitted.
Re:Umm... (Score:5)
Trademark ownership in the USA does not imply trademark ownership in Germany. But it will be important to the case of the trademarking firm to demonstrate the use of their trademark in Germany (and in the USA). They can do neither, so unless the German trademark application process is extremely liberal, this can be easily opposed.
You may be thinking of copyright. Copyright is internationalized by the Berne Convention, a treaty which nearly all countries have signed. (The USA was one of the last holdouts, before anybody gets on a high horse.)
Re:UNIX? (Score:1)
May have something confused there, though...
Re:folkenspiel defined (Score:1)
Actually, I believe it's Volkswagen. But it would be pronounced Folksvagen, ja?
Andy
Stay calm (Score:5)
At the moment it's a little bit difficult with Trademark in's Germany. There's for example a Trademark on Y2K and on Webspace.
It's silly and obviously for money-grabbing. They even tried to auction the rights for Y2K on ebay.de. But in the last weeks, some people tried to register things like WWW or FvG(the initials of a german lawyer who is know to bring you to court if you don't follow trademark laws(for example the use of Triton referring to the Motherboard-Chipset or the Name Explorer (Microsoft signed a contract to use this name in Germany))).
So it's probably, that someone's registering linux before somebody evil can do this, if it's at all possible to register it. At the moment the trademark isn't registered yet, there's only a request for it.
Stay calm,
Keef
sorry for my english...
Re:Achtung! Allen Lookenspeepers... (Score:1)
----------
Not the first law suit in Germany (Score:2)
In this article [linux-verband.de] (in german) from 17.9.1997 it is mentioned, that the last owner of trademark granted all rights to Linus Tovarlds.
He also mentioned, that he only protected the trademark in for the linux community.
LINUX DISTRIBUTION MONOPOLY (Score:1)
If this applications succeeds, they can position themselves to be the sole distributor of the gnu/linux operating system. They say they won't but that does not mean they will. Not very good.
The best course of action I see is to file a counter to that application. If Channel One intention is true, failing the application would not affect them. That is, they can be sure that no other company will be able to force them to pay money for the use of linux trademark. If their intention is not.... well..
Any volunteers? I'm not German.
Hasdi
Already been "Embraced and Extended" (Score:1)
So Microsoft would have to add 3...
Re:Already been "Embraced and Extended" (Score:1)
%^&@!#!@#%&^!@%#&
Re:UNIX? (Score:1)
So... its quite possible to have a 'Linux' brand washing machine, and a 'Linux' brand operating system without any trademark conflicts.
Re:folkenspiel defined (Score:1)
Whatever.
--
- Sean
Re:Gott, das sichere babelfish saugt nicht es? (Score:1)
--
- Sean
Betcha RedHat has the Money.... (Score:1)
Trust me, this has no chance.
Taiwan... (Score:1)
Re:Australian trademark owner? (Score:1)
Re:Australian trademark owner? (Score:3)
http://pericles. ipaustralia.gov.au/atmoss/falcon.application_start [ipaustralia.gov.au]
This whole thing raises a question in my mind though. I thought Linux International was supposed to be protecting these trade marks. Why don't they just rock though all nations and just buy the trade mark now?
It would save some time later...
PS: There appears to be someone squatting on linuxinternational.net and linuxinternational.com
Re:Oh, COME ON! (Score:2)
Re:hmm (Score:2)
Thanks for playing though...
Re:active defense (Score:1)
I believe this was the case with using the words "a monopoly type board game." Although I am not positive, I believe Parker Brothers lost because it was deemed that, in the descriptive sense, the term monopoly game has become common.
I am sure there are better examples (Vasilene, Kleenex, etc.) but I can't think of them at the moment.
Re:Sorry we are full... (Score:1)
I think this discussion just invoked Godwin's Law.
Re:Lashdotsay (Score:3)
Lashdotsay (Score:1)
Trademark Tango (Score:1)
Funny.
Re:Oh no, not again (Score:2)
The same reasons crackers are the only ones who crack machines. And car mechanics replace good parts to charge for labor. Everyone uses their skillz to get what they want, when you understand the law you can try to manipulate it, even when you are sure it is illegal (even if you don't think so personally). People do what they can, lawyers just happen to be able to fsck the rest of us with their silly reindeer games. Is there a nice derogative term for crackin' lawyers? (or does "lawyer" pretty much cover it?)
Re:Oh, COME ON! (Score:2)
Arguably, Linux is the same.
It seems to me that the best way to protect the Linux name may be to go around trademark law entirely and go to where the real power is--lobby Merriam-Webster to put it in their next unabridged dictionary.
Translation Re:No reason to panic (Score:2)
---
Conflict over "Linux" put aside [linux-verband.de]
Wiesbane/Offene Systeme, 17 September 1997
On 17 September 1999, an open discussion about the registration of the trademark "Linux" took place at the annual congress of the Open Systems/German Unix Users Group (GUUG).
Those present:
Wolfgang Dreyer, Linux International
Achim Cloer, LIVE Linux-Verband / Delta Internet
Edmund Humenberger, Owner of the Trademark "Linux" in Germany
Rainer Feldkamp, Patent Attorney
Christian Hüttermann, Owner/operator of the domain linux.de
Moderated by:
Martin Schulte, GUUG e.V.
Mr. Humenberger, owner of the German trademark "Linux", sent a license agreement in mid-July 1997 to Christian Hüttermann, owner/operator of Linux.de, in which Mr. Humenberger guaranteed 10 years' use of the trademark "Linux" in return for an agreement not to resort to legal recourse.
In response, Mr. Hütterman referred the matter to the Linux Verband LIVE, Linux International and the GUUG.
The first contact regarding this situation came in a telephone converstaion between Achim Cloer and Mr. Humenberger, in which no agreement was reached.
Further process was placed in the hands of Mr. Feldkamp, a patent attorney and Linux user, in coordination with the various associations and with an American patent attorney.
In the course of the meeting, the representatives of the involved groups reviewed the current events.
Wolfgang Dreyer, as representative of Linux International, announced that, at a metting between patent attorney Feldkamp and Mr. Humenberger shortly before, an agreement had been reached. During the open discussion, Mr. Humenberger transferred his rights to the name "Linux" to Linus Torvalds in full.
At the end of the meeting, Mr. Humenberger made the following statement with regards to his actions:
Mr. Humenberger had followed a discussion in newsgroups regarding the registration of the name "Linux" since 1993. As no interest group in the Linux community existed at that time, Mr. Humenberger reigstered the name himself to protect it on behalf of the Linux community.
Herewith is the controversy about the German trademark "Linux" and the related registered marque "Linux" resolved. ---
One would hope that ChannelOne [channelone.de] would have similar intentions. I do know that they have been involved in Linux for some time, so let's hope they are benevolent enough to give Linus the rights...
Ethelred [surf.to]
Oh no, not again (Score:2)
I remember when some jerk (read: lawyer) started posting messages to the Linux newsgroups a long time ago saying that everybody running Linux had to send him money because he "patented" it or something.
If a court ever sides with these types of scum, I'll have to make a mental note to never live in that country. It would be fairly obvious that their courts are more concerned with the game of law than actually protecting honest people's rights.
Why are lawyers the only people who ever try this stuff?
you what ? (Score:2)
Anyway, what happened to the hope of Linus being able to own the copyright... that seemed the clever idea, a bit like the GPL (yeah, I know... not linus) in effect.
Oh, COME ON! (Score:2)
If I file a trademark claim in Germany for the words 'German' and 'Deutsch', can I force every German to pay royalties for their use? Actually, after I trademark them I think I'll just change their definition to something more appropriate...
I own the trademark on "the" (Score:2)
Now don't get all upset. I am a reasonable person and will not place excessive burdens on your use of the®. If you would like to include the® in your essays, documents, letters, program comments (and any other linguistic medium), I will make it very easy for you to obtain a license, with little red tape and at a low cost. Normally you should estimate a $100 license fee for each appearance of the®, although I will perfectly happy to negotiate bulk rates for novelists, newspaper editors and others with special needs.
Can't you see how co-operative I am willing to be? How could anyone complain?
You must understand, of course, that the® law requires me to aggressively protect my intellectual property rights. If I allow casual uses of the® to go unchallenged, I may lose my trademark claims in the® future, and we don't want that to happen. Therefore, if I see any further unlicensed uses of the® in Slashdot or other media in the® future, I am afraid my lawyers will have to get in touch with the® authors. If things get too bad, I may have file charges against CmdrTaco. But no hard feelings of course, it's nothing personal; just business. Have a nice day.
International Trademarks (Score:4)
You have to apply for trademarks, patents, etc in each country where you do business. Should someone else clain your trademark before you, you could be out of luck unless you have some kind of legal precedent. For example, say soemone registered the trademark coca-cola in their country. A couple of years later, the coca-cola company decides that they want to start selling coke in that country. So they Sue, and point out that they hold the trademark in every other country in the world. End of discussion.
The problem with this is that the Coca-cola co. would have the money to bring proper legal power to bear in case the country in question gets all uppity. To the best of my knowledge, Linux does not.
Re:Penalties for doing stupid legal things (Score:2)
Actually, you can. You can use your power as a consumer to refuse to do business with them. Take your business elsewhere. Tell your colleagues to take their business elsewhere. Circulate the news, and tell people what you think about it.
That's a lot of what
Babelfish translation: (Score:3)
" Linux " soon no longer freely?
Those Hamburg patent lawyers Hauck, Graalfs, Wehnert let protect the word label " Linux " with the German patent office. This acknowledged today a coworker of the partnership on request of c't. also the German label page specifies the trademark protection. In number 36 of 9.9.1999 (page 9919) Linux under the document reference 399 36 517,6 in the category software is listed.
Which aims at trademark owner Roy Boldt with the log-on, is unclear. The managing director Hamburg system houses and the management consultation of the ChannelOne was by telephone not attainable today despite several attempts. Whether it concerns a new case of Markengrabbing, or whether Boldt wants to concern unselfishly like a Austrian Linux trademark owner , remains for the time being in the dark.
However Boldt of the label cannot be safe " Linux " yet. After US right the trademarks are situated since 1997 with Linux father Linus Torvalds. Torvalds had itself the rights however only before court firstrides.
The output of a comparable law case in Germany would be meanwhile uncertain. After information of the German patent office the trademark law at the respective state borders ends. How it continues here to country will only show up, in the next weeks. To 9.12.99 the contradiction period runs against word label " Linux ". Up to then everyone can make a " relative protection obstacle in such a way specified " valid. The patent office is already prepared for such a case. The form " W7202 " designated for any objections has already a fixed workstation in the Internet.
{end translation}
Penalties for doing stupid legal things (Score:2)
I wonder if somebody could make the legal argument that doing such dumb things cause a lot of people/companies to waste legal & financial resources to counter the bogus trademark/patent, and that the trademark/patent filer is liable for that amount (like a class action lawsuit against a company for causing "damage" to the class frivilously).
Of course, what's really needed is a BTTH (Boot To The Head) for the people in the Patent Office who keep approving these things & for the Congresscritters who futzed around with the laws enough to make this kind of situation a big bonanza for companies that like to litigate their way to profits.
Re:Penalties for doing stupid legal things (Score:2)
The particular companies/individuals that I was complaining about are those which just build a portfolio of dumb patents/trademarks, then go around suing people who won't give them money to license their so-called IP. These people/companies could care less whether they irritate a consumer - they just want to be parasites on the backs of people/organizations who are actually USING the idea to do something productive.
Even for those companies that ARE selling products which you can "choose" not to buy, 1) the fact that they're trying to use intimidation to prevent competition against their product indicates that they are probably so short-sighted in viewpoint that they won't be able to make the connection between their legal behavior & their loss in sales unless slapped upside the head with the massive 2x4 of public hatred, and 2) the whole point of the patent system is to provide temporary monopolies, which means that you may NOT be able to find another company which provides that kind of product (or any other company which does it going to be paying licensing fees to the 1st anyway).
I don't particularly agree with the current idea of patents, anyway - if two companies/individuals perform all of the proper R&D to create a particular idea, and one just happens to file the patent a little earlier than the other, then the other company/individual is SOL. I think that if you do the R&D, you should be allowed to reap the fruits of that labor. If it can be proven that you stole the ideas from somebody else, THEN they can throw the book at you.
Re:UNIX? (Score:2)
Hmm.. (Score:2)
Copyrights are indeed international, although they are not worldwide. As DHartung pointed out earlier, this is thanks to the Berne Convention. I believe that trademarks can be applied for on a number of levels.. I forget what all of them are, I know a couple are national and statewide. I remember seeing something about an international search on a few trademark sites, but to be honest, I've never been very interested because trademarking costs money (and a lot of headache if you want to keep said trademark).
you're wrong but ... (Score:2)
Which basically says that trademarks acquired in one EU state can't be diluted in other EU mamber states [ladas.com]
I seem to remember that Linux is a [tm] in Austria, and guess that it might be one in Finland, which would mean bad news for Mr. Brodt.
More generally, a trademark isn't something like a patent or a copyright which you can just have on the shelf. Trademark law exists to protect companies against unscrupulous imitators cashing in on their goodwill. Which means that you typically have to be actually trading to keep your trademark. Unless the German guys start producing a proprietary product fairly similar to Linux (good luck guys), they won't get the [tm].
On the other hand, German [tm] law is widely known to suck, so there may be more to it than this.
jsm
Lawyers and the Earth (Score:2)
Bablefish (Score:2)