Slashdot Mirror
Update on Uruguay "Linux" Trademark Situation
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.
Shouldn't we form some sort of movement that goes around and registers trademarks for Linux to Linus in every country in the world?
Failure isn't falling. Failure is staying down.
Is it just me, or is that Open Letter they wrote a bit wordy and confusing?
Connah
Connah
"Your mouse has moved. Windows NT must be restarted for this change to take effect."
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.
dejense de joder con tratar de registrar linux! que los uruguayos y argentinos son casi lo mismo y nos van a hacer quedar mal a todos!
True... too true... someone moderate this post up.
The use of my trademarks terms may be used in slashdot stories and comments for $25 per use.
RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!
That is pretty much all I got out of French class.
Oh and another thing. In France, all the doors are labeled with the formal, plural form of the word push - Poussez!. I just thought the pronunciation of the word was funny as hell when I was over there. Oh well what the hell am I talking about.
Man that was the funniest thing I have read on Slashdot since MEEPT.
Dude, it's URUGUAY!!
I'm growing very tired of the incompetence of the
This is necessary...life, feeds on life...
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
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?
There's no reason for a sig here.
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.
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.
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
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.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
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!
Blar.
ahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa shut up.
Does that mean that Linus can sue all companies that have the word "Linux" in their name for violating hit trademark?
There's no reason for a sig here.
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.
Let's talk again about an all-too-familiar subject: M&Ms and its huffy morals. I want to share this with you because M&Ms's epithets are a blatantly obvious and cleverly orchestrated script, carefully concocted to disguise the complexity of color, the brutality of class, and the importance of religion and sexual identity in the construction and practice of factionalism. Although M&Ms won't admit it, it is appalling to me that it has managed to allow federally-funded research to mushroom into a myopic, grossly-inefficient system, hampered by ignorant ruffians and irritable spoilsports. I want to keep this brief: M&Ms would have us believe that imprudent con artists should be given absolute authority to distract people from serious analysis of the situation. It is similarly noteworthy that M&Ms has stated that the sky is falling. That's just pure hedonism. Well, in M&Ms's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that the worst types of vulgar insincere cretins there are are burdened with the preconceived ideas or feeble understanding of the circles to which they previously belonged, both politically and philosophically. M&Ms simply regurgitates the empty arguments that have been fed to it over the years. I state these facts only to give a bit of personal background as to why witless alarmism is now and has long been a mainstay of M&Ms's screeds. M&Ms's cronies do not accept the fact that we must acknowledge as a people that for every dollar we spend to better our communities, M&Ms'll spend a thousand more to demand that Earth submit to the dominion of demonic slimy voluptuaries. People have commented that there may be a gap in my logic there. I don't think there is, and I've gone to great pains to explain why. Accompanying this recognition of the indeterminateness of verifiability with regard to an external, objective reality has been a crisis regarding our ability to know that I believe I have finally figured out what makes organizations like M&Ms treat traditional values as if they were anal-retentive blasphemous crimes. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world. I assume that M&Ms is unaware of its obligation not to force me to choke to death, as this unawareness would be consistent with its prior displays of ignorance. The interesting point is this: We've all heard M&Ms yammer and whine about how it's being scapegoated again, the poor dear. M&Ms's lackeys want to influence the attitudes of dominant culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly avaricious for one purpose and one purpose only: to resort to ad hominem attacks on me and my family. Is it possible for those who defend cocky larrikinism to make their defense look more conceited than it currently is? More prosaically, M&Ms's insinuations have grown into the world's greatest enslavers of human minds. Given the range and unpredictability of human behavior, it is quite possible that I'm sticking out my neck a bit in talking about M&Ms's shenanigans. It's quite likely it will try to retaliate against me for my telling you that at least 80 percent of the people in this country recognize that it has no evidence or examples to back up its point. I call this phenomenon "M&Ms-ism". So please permit me to appropriate and paraphrase something I once heard: "M&Ms keeps coming up with new ways to replicate the most brain-damaged structures of contemporary life." There's one thing you can undoubtedly say about M&Ms: It has a sense of humor. It was being a real comedian when it told us that censorship could benefit us. M&Ms's hijinks celebrate deception, diversion, and fashion. Even more remarkable, M&Ms's disquisitions appeal to people who are fearful about the world's political and economic situation and long for simple solutions to complex problems. M&Ms does not want to revive an arcadian past that never existed because it is unbalanced, mudslinging, gin-swilling, and lackadaisical (though, granted, M&Ms is all of the aforementioned), but rather because M&Ms's jibes would be less destructive if they were less goofy. We don't need to demonize M it is already a demon, and furthermore, no matter how much its expostulations are rationalized, they still turn over our country to what I call sleazy proletariats. Given the public appetite for more accountability, M&Ms's outrage at complaints about it is indicative of its self-esteem and value system. Ergo, you shouldn't take threats made by pea-brained insufferable pseudo-intellectuals too seriously. Take it from me: M&Ms believes that its imprecations epitomize wholesome family entertainment. Sorry, but I have to call foul on that one. I am, of course, referring to a recent occurrence which is so well-known, it requires no comment, except to add that M&Ms should focus more on the quality of its writing than on the amount of drivel it can squeeze in. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we lived in a world without gutless purveyors of malice and hatred? There are some prissy bourgeoisie who are catty. There are also some who are unenlightened. Which category does M&Ms fall into? If the question overwhelms you, I suggest you check "both". Doesn't M&Ms ever get tired of calling everyone "careless stool pigeons"? Still, M&Ms's "compromises" have reached a depth of degeneracy that was virtually unknown in the past. In point of fact, M&Ms's canards carry multiple connotations, ranging from the virulent (they pursue a counter-productive agenda under the guise of false concern for the environment, poverty, civil rights, or whatever) to the besotted (they hold annual private conferences in which blathering opportunists are invited to present their "research"). Here's an extraordinary paradox: All of the anti-democratic sociopaths who shouldn't be allowed to undermine the individualistic underpinnings of traditional jurisprudence invariably want to. M&Ms's henchmen have demonstrated brutally, horribly, and with great terror how they will oppose the visceral views of 98 percent of the nation's citizens. The sole point of agreement between myself and bloodthirsty popinjays is that M&Ms and its cronies are puppets of lackluster manipulators of the public mind. If M&Ms continues to burn our fair cities to the ground, crime will escalate as schools deteriorate, corruption increases, and quality of life plummets. In that respect, we can say that I don't know how to deal with choleric disaffected-types. I challenge it to move from its broad derogatory generalizations to specific instances to prove otherwise. M&Ms wants to clear-cut ancient forest lands. But what if the tables were turned? How would M&Ms like that? True, it is the height of arrogance and untruthfulness for M&Ms to imply that human beings should be appraised by the number of things and the amount of money they possess instead of by their internal value and achievements, but this is a free country, and I claim we ought to keep it that way. Most of us who have been around for a while realize that M&Ms is incapable of handling an adult emotion or a universal concept without first reducing it to something malignant, unimaginative, inhumane, and probably devious. All in all, the really interesting thing about all this is not that when someone bends knee to M&Ms's non-negotiable demands, it pushes and pushes for more. The interesting thing is that if we let it achieve total world domination, all we'll have to look forward to in the future is a public realm devoid of culture and a narrow and routinized professional life untouched by the highest creations of civilization. That doesn't necessarily mean that the primary weapons of M&Ms's narrow-minded assistants are lies and deception. Rather, it means that I am starting a grassroots campaign with the sole purpose of stopping M&Ms. While perhaps offensive to some readers, only a direct quote can fully convey the perverted fork-tongued nature and content of M&Ms's hatchet jobs: "Attention, helpers! Your orders are to denigrate and discard all of Western culture, and to do so at any cost." To displace meaningful discussion of an issue's merit or demerit with hunch and emotion is M&Ms's objective, and beer-guzzling frightful deconstructionism is its method. Following this line of logic, it would appear that M&Ms is inherently arrogant, headstrong, and malicious. Oh, and it also has a self-indulgent mode of existence. Unfortunately, I can already see the response to this letter. Someone, possibly M&Ms itself or one of its toadies, will write a deceitful piece about how utterly brutal I am. If that's the case, then so be it. What I just wrote sorely needed to be written.
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
---
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
I'm sure you are going to be beating yourself over the head about this for a while. So sad.
It sure is a sign of your incompetence. That's for sure.
There's no reason for a sig here.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
good points....
Intresting document he typed up.
I eat peanuts.
Mine are salty!
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
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.
One day you might even learn how to spell "sentence".
Please, kill the spelling flames.
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?
There's no reason for a sig here.
This trademark stuff will go on and on as long :) to protect the
:)
LINUX isnt protected internationally.
So it would IMHO a strong move into the new
millenium (coming next year
LINUX trade mark world wide.
OT side note:
One nice thing about Linux and friends: if a
company tries to get the monopoly for a Linux
distribution by covering the rights to import a
dedicated commercial Linux distribution (say
SuSE for Uruguay) and tries to sell at high price
levels without offering some reward (support...),
other distributions with better performance/price
ratios can take over.
So Charles Darwin is our friend
And we should therefore take care of our beloved
Debianistas. It's always nice to have a backup ace
sitting in your sleeve.
BTW: Who takes care to protect the DEBIAN
trade mark world wide?
--gfish666
You auto-generated that using some "screed generator", right? Gotta be ... Gotta be ... Stuff like ... "A trip to your local library would reveal that the pair of Linux resellers has a long, factionalism-infested history of attempts to befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion" Too funny.
...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.
It's beyond sad when supposedly intelligent operators of a technical site are incapable of a) spelling Uruguay, or b)looking it up, or c) differentiating between the name of the country (Uruguay) and the description of one of its residents (Uruguayan).
Come on guys, I know that America is the most ethnocentic nation on the planet (I grew up here, after all) but even so...
--- Bill
As for your remark on ethnocentrism in the United States, all I can say is that I'm a white boy
HOLLDERIN' 187 WITH MY DICK IN YOU MOUTH BIATCH
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.
/. 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.
I really wouldn't mind a mistake here or there, but
BTW, it's spelled "sentence".
And yes, I am beating myself over the head over that post. Thanks for pointing it out.
This is necessary...life, feeds on life...
If they had been interested in preserving the name "Linux", they could have taken it upon themselves to contact Linus and tell him that they were going to register "Linux" in Linus' name to prevent any mis-understanding or attempted power grabs.
Since they did not say that they had even ATTEMPTED to contact Linus, and that we can see that they are interested in registering "Linux" under their names, we can assume that their intents were not the most noble.
It really doesn't matter, anyway. Assuming trademark law is similar throughout the world, it would be simplistic to show prior usage.
Hell, even a posting from their user group would be enough to show that whomever registered "Linux" was NOT the person who originated the term.
Provided you fill in the correct forms and the offical signing the paperwork doesn't know any better.
Then it is up to you to DEFEND your trademark against all persons claiming prior usage.
Then it depends upon the cluelessness of the judge in the case.
These people are losers. They should have found a way to register it to Linus even though he is not a citizen of their country.
That would have been a benefit to the communitee.
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 del intento la vez próxima.
There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
However, you need to take into consideration that this is probably not their first language. I can speak and read Japanese, but if you asked me to write an article such as the one they wrote I would not even come close to their sincere attempt. Give people credit where credit is due.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
"Get your domain name for only $45"
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
www.haidacarver.com
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...
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. UYLUG also posted another link on Slashdot regarding the case. The link leads to a document 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.
Use Adsense for Charity
dude, that's so fucked up... show some love for the worldwide brotherhood of computer geeks. After all, the blue M&Ms may have weaker shells, but do they not taste as sweet? peace and solidarity -A.C.
AM or PM?
Don't be an idiot.
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...
-------------------------
-------------------------
"People ask FAQs all the time". - David Allen
UM... the term Linux is already trademarked in the USA (USPTO), and yet somehow everyone is able to use the term here.
Why is any other country different?
How come we are bitching about Uraguay when someone already did it in the US?
Why is this any different or that the US is NOT a wrong patent.
Barrapunto (a Slashdot-inspired site in Spanish) ran a story on this too. They point out that Enrique Place, one of the LinuxTech guys, appears on UYLUG's official bylaws (or statutes, or whatever they are called in American English, of which I'm definitely not a native speaker --hint, hint--). These people knew each other before.
Their story also comments on the rambling nature of the UYLUG's communication. The letter signers claim that their first letter was not an official UYLUG statement, but merely some users' views. It, however, ends in two paragraphs declaring the steps the UYLUG is taking towards securing the LINUX trademark.
Also check out the comments for double postings, capitalized ALLEGATIONS (all of them signed AC) and general bad vibes.
My take: both groups hate the other group's member's guts. This trademark affair is the Free Software equivalent of mutual hair pulling, face scratching, and eye-gouging.
The reason I don't log in but choose to post as an AC is that these guys (both UYLUG and LinuxTech) make me ashamed to be part of the Spanish-speaking Linux community. But mind you, both of them would fit perfectly in any company but each other's. These people are really nice, they just aren't nice to each other.
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
vatos locos uruguayecos, consejo: olvidar la pena del ano atrás y gozar de lleno milenio que entra.. la mamada esa de la marca registrada la mandas o a Linus oala chingada.
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...
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
There has to be some reason that they keep making the same mistakes over and over again.
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.
--
I ate something that disagreed with me. Maybe I should have cooked him first.
s/sentence/paragraph/, and I hate freudian slips.
--
I ate something that disagreed with me. Maybe I should have cooked him first.
> At this time, the situation is one that the Uruguyan Trademark office will need to decide who will receive the trademark.
That should be a simple decision: whoever offers the largest bribe-- uh, "incentive"...
--
This sig for rent.
It may simply be my own early morning inability or the translation but I suspect it's the legalese-ish weasel wording.
Lots of words, but which meaning do they really have?
1. We're getting this to keep anyone else from limiting our use and we'll be good guys and not limit others. (And kindly stop flaming us for doing the right thing.)
or
2. We're getting this to keep anyone else from using it. (And go to hell, we know what's best for US. We do NOT care about YOU!)
?
If it is case #1, just clumsily handled, fine. Right idea and folks make mistakes.
If case #2, well, they just ruined their reputation didn't they? Who would help them? Who would buy from them if they had any other choice? (Yes, they seek to limit choice - and they will fail - the 'net is kinda funny that way.)
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
"Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
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."
My office has been taken over by iPod people.
Um, that should be " S E N T E N C E ."
And that still gets a moderation of 1. What the fuck?
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.
"U-are-gay" is a joke from The Simpsons! Homer is looking at a globe, and he sees Uruguay and says, "Look at the name of this country! U-R-Gay! Hee hee hee!"
Still, I wonder how he missed the 'u' before the 'g' and the 'u' after the 'g'. "U! R-U-Gway?" Perhaps one could misread it as "You! Are you gay?" Well, almost...
And, I can see someone misspelling a word and not noticing (which happens a lot), but not noticing that you've doubled the first letter? That's unforgivable!
How many ways can you misspell "Uurguay", "Uruguayan" "Uruguyan" in one article?
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.
--The knowledge that you are an idiot, is what distinguishes you from one.
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 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)
--
--
Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!
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)
If the word 'linux' were to be submitted to all the dictionary publishers along with a definition, then it presumably would no longer be Trademarkeable anymore. The only reason it can be trademarked now is because it it a made-up word. Frank Ranner
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? ;)
You know what to do with the HELLO. ...
Help create an open-source world
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 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.
You know what to do with the HELLO. ...
Help create an open-source world
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.
Read between the lines while parsing.
Is the formula open source?
Your welcome to investigate, the "other" Linux® trademark filed at the USPTO is availible here.
Will I retire or break 10K?
"A backwards country that has more fun killing its people" - sounds the US - when are you gonna copy us Europeans and abolish the death penalty?
I don't see how the Uraguayan trademark office is making a fool of the country. The same could not be said for the US patent office, allowing patents for stuff like one-click shopping.
Shame neither the US or slashdot has a way of keeping racists from harassing people.