Slashdot Mirror
Linux Trademark Domain Crackdown
CgiJobs writes "SeriousDomains.com was going to try and auction off a bunch of Linux domain names. Looks like Linus Torvald's lawyers scared them off, though. I saw the domains before they yanked them and they weren't much to get excited about. Most were quite long. " So - is this a good thing? Or a bad thing?
This sounds like what Sun did in 1996, going after a bunch of domain names that included the word "java." See the NetSurfer Digest summarizing the story.
SeriousDomains would not be infringing anyone's trademark rights by selling domains with the word "Linux" in them. The buyer of those domains wouldn't be infringing by buying them, either -- it's what you do with them that counts.
For what it's worth, Microsoft has allowed many domains to include its trademarks for years -- windows95.com and activex.com are two examples. It seems odd that someone who gave away intellectual property worth millions -- his operating system -- would be exerting a trademark claim over domains while the closed-source bajillionaires at Microsoft are looking the other way.
Rogers Cadenhead (Web: http://www.cadenhead.org/workbench)
Linus is probably getting smart and checking to see who is getting the domain names. I know It'd be irritating to go to linuxsomething.org and be confronted with say, tons of popups and porn. Enough of that and people would get the wrong idea. I have no problems with him doing this.
The difference is that Etoy.com had their domain for years, and were using it in a generally accepted 'appropriate' manner, and etoys fucked them over.
IN this case, a domain speculator registered a bunch of linux domains in order to make a profit from selling them later, which is a filthy practice, and linus *already* has the trademark...
Look. I bet it wouldn't hold up in court.. but what domain speculator would go to court over it? They don't care...
Parodies on known names are perfectly legal. Microslutsux.com would be a perfectly legal names, as long as they dont pretend to be a true microsoft site, but present (anything near obvious) them selves are a real parodie. Think of 'Naked gun' and other parodies..
The trademark/copyright infriction comes into places if they try to setup a linux site, with the real Linux(Tm) name doing linux stuff.
This would obviously be a difference to a parodie.
However linus has done this kind of thing before, to prevent people from misusing the linux name,think of the (old?) owner of linux.co.uk, who was abusing the linux name and domain, linus used his Tm there in a benifitial way as well. But most of the time, he'll allow just about anything to happen, as long as it doesnt 'hurt' the 'linux(tm)' name.
-- Chris Chabot
"I dont suffer from insanity, i enjoy every minute of it!"
Fair enough. Just as Microsoft is the arbiter of who uses their trademarks.
I really hope that all those other sites have done as this site claims, or else there is the question of selectivity. As in "Anyone can create a Linux distribution, and call it xyz Linux or whatever, but should you wish to market it, you need Linus' approval?"
This is a bit worrisome.
I use a piece of software called WinGuard. This is like saying Microsoft could pick and choose titling and naming. Think about winfiles.com too.
This is all a little ambiguous, I haven't had enough coffee yet, but apply some lateral thinking. I'm not screaming, I'm just trying to evaluate this.
Yes, I hate the idea of domain squatting. It sucks.
Linus owns Linux' trademark. But is he the arbiter of all things Linux? I don't think so, and I don't think he thinks so either. Someone mentioned using this to try to squash LinuxOne. I don't like that idea at all, much as I dislike what they're trying to do. It sounds very slippery (as in the slope).
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
One more thought - what about parody or comic site names?
"Our understanding of their position is that we cannot have an outright auction of domain names that contain the word Linux, and that those legitimate Linux consultancies or programming shops that are interested in any of our domain names that incorporate Linux® must approach Mr. Torvalds et al to make sure that the domain name is worthy to be granted a license..."
I'm sorry - that bit right there gives me shivers, plain and simple. This is, quite honestly, the first lawyerly bit surrounding Linux, GNU, or the GPL that has honest-to-god worried or scared me.
=-I
From what I gather about the statement, it seems that the lawyers are implying that anything with the word "linux" in the domain has to be "approved" by them. What about a domain like Microsoftsucks.com? Or a parody website of some sort? Would they also need permission? Or is this just for auctions?
icqqm [ICQ:11952102]
Is it possible for him to keep them from using "Linux" in their company name (and thus stop their quasi-bunk IPO)? If it is, is it proper for him to do so?
Irrespective of that, there has been a lot of stink raised recently regarding LinuxOne. The "word on the street" (Wall Street) is that this is an operation just trying to cash in on the word "Linux" and not really offer anything except an IPO. A get-rich-quick scheme. If this goes through, it could seriously damage the credibility of "Linux" (quotes added to indicate the word and the image, separated from the actual product), and that hurts every legitimate Linux user, Linux administrator, and Linux support-and-sales company.
Linus is doing the right thing.
There are those who accuse people like Linus of being despots... and they're right. but Linus is a benevolent despot. And given the propensity the online community has for divisiveness and special-interests-at-the-cost-of-everybody-else, I think that's a Good Thing.