How does it affect user groups Re: [SGVLUG] Linux Trade mark ...

[David Lawyer]

On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 06:25:30AM -0700, Dustin wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, David Lawyer wrote:
> 
> > I would oppose it on principle that attribution is a big waste of
> > time (including reader's time) and bandwidth.  I think the danger of a
> > lawsuit from LMI is less than that of being struck by lightening on
> > the way to a LUG meeting.
> 
> I am not suggesting we do it because LMI is likely to get nasty, and I'm
> fairly sure I said exactly that.  I am suggesting we do it because it is
> the right thing to do.  Widespread acknowledgement of "Linux" as a
> trademark of Linus Torvalds makes LMI's job a little easier, which means
> less money going to lawyers to defend it, which means LMI has to raise
> less money from these fees in the first place.

Common words such as Linux should not require one to mention that they
are trademarks each time they are used.  Thus I don't think it's the
right thing to do.  Of course it's also wrong for anyone else to try
to get "Linux" as a trademark, but 2 wrongs don't make a right.

I'm not even sure that "Linux" is a trademark anymore since it's also
become a word in the English language.  It's legal for a name to
escape from trademark status and I think that "Unix" may have escaped
but it hasn't been tested in court.  What would the world be like if
"Linux" was not a trademark?  Then people wouldn't need to pay LMI to
use it and LMI wouldn't need to exist.  But then some might use the
name "Linux" incorrectly and call themselves "Linux ..." when they are
not, but with the Internet, they might get a bad reputation if they
did.  The problem would be that people would then trademark say "...
Linux" and there would get to be too many names involving "Linux" that
one couldn't use.

So I guess that after thinking about it I'm now neutral as the whether
sgvlug should acknowledge "Linux" as a trademark.  I've changed my
view while writing this email.


Which is the bigger waste
> of time in the long run--a sentence at the bottom of one page with nobody
> reads (and if you think that is a "big" waste of bandwidth, I suggest you
> try to change the HTML standard because it wastes an awful lot more
Absolutely true. (400 terrabyes of HTML pages worldwide (my rough
estimate: Google indexes 8 giga pages) vs say 100 bytes at sgvlug).

> bandwidth than that just in duplicated tags and unnecessary delimiters),
> or multiple lawsuits in multiple countries just to try to keep the name
> "Linux" from being stolen?
> 
> And also because anyone who registers a trademark on something they had
> nothing to do with just to cash in is a thief and I'd like to make it
> just a little easier to take away their swag.
> 
> Dustin
			David Lawyer