Slashdot Mirror
The End of the Free PCI Device List (Update)
imann writes "For many years, Jim Boemler was the maintainer of a free PCI device table which reference all the PCI ID's of PCI Devices. This service is used by Free Operating Systems for keeping up to date their pci device list. That was a very usefull service for us (i was working in a Linux distro in the hardware suport team). It was wonderfull until the PCI-SIG had their lawyers cease and desisted him to stop this service because of the use of the PCI logo AND name ! You don't have the right to use the three letters P,C,I ! Incredible... So he was forced to close his website.
This is a incredible loss for the hardware support in the Free Software world. I hope PCI-SIG will change its position !
Please support Jim." A friend emailed me to point out that many /.ers have been emailing the wrong person to complain....read on for details...
Jamal wrote, "The story you posted is causing us a headache. Our CTO, Alan Deikman is being bombarded by emails from people reading that story.
Alan is not the person in charge of the PCI SIG, his only sin is that Znyx
did host the PCI sig in the early 90s and he was the list maintainer. This
was a gracious act and should not be rewarded the way it is now. Infact he is
trying to help the gent with that website to see if things get resolved." Alan's email was posted on the page we linked to, erroneously.
Trademark law requires them to enforce their trademarks. Of course they should just license it for cheap. I guess the lawyers don't really care about technical issues.
let their public relations firm know..... from the webpage before they take it down.... {posting anon since the company I work for is a member.... we will also let them know through our own internal channels... but here goes]
[http://www.pcisig.com/membership/contact_us]
General and Administration:
PCI Special Interest Group (PCI-SIG)
5440 SW Westgate Dr., #217
Portland, OR 97221
Phone: 503-291-2569
FAX: 503-297-1090
administration@pcisig.com
Media & Analyst Contact:
Lisa Sherwin
VTM Public Relations
Phone: 503-297-3704
Fax: 503-297-1090
lsherwin@vtm-inc.com
OK, first, if he's using the "official" PCI logo, fine, stop using it. Understandable if he didn't get rights to the name.
Second, if he uses the word PCI, they surely can't stop him from just using it (which is a lot different than naming his site PCI something or another). i.e. If his site is the "Free List of PC Addon Cards" and he states within his site that the add on cards are restricted to those supporting PCI, then I can't see how they can bust him for that.
Third, in the C&D letter, they end it by saying that they recommend that he figure out a way to possibly have his site under the auspices of PCI-SIG. So fine, they aren't opposed to the concept of the site and they appear (at least on the surface) to be willing to work with him. So it doesn't appear to me to be quite as bad as everyone is making it out to be. Now if they were saying that he couldn't publish the information contained within the site, now THAT would be worthy of outrage.
Have you reported this to Chilling Effects?
Search their database for the various notices. You're probably not alone. Others can probably give you advice on where to turn...
PCISIG has been remade from a standards organization to a source of revenue for the bastards running it.
Of course, if you had actually taken the time to read the letter, you'd see that PCI-SIG is a not-for-profit corporation, and that they want to work amicably to move the list onto the PCI-SIG website. I don't see what's wrong with this, nobody objects to IBM's right to trademark "IBM".
I say we all call them whenever we need data on our PCI devices.
Here's their contact info
PCI-SIG
General and Administration
Phone #: 503-291-2569
Fax #: 503-297-1090
administration@pcisig.org
Media & Analyst Contact
Lisa Sherwin
VTM Public Relations
Phone #: 503-297-3704
Fax #: 503-297-1090
lsherwin@vtm-inc.com
Microsoft's Tony Pierce is currently the Chairman of the Board of Directors what better way to stem the tide of Open Source than to remove a valuable reference tool.
PCI-SIG Board of Directors
Neutrons are slippery little rascals, they can fool you. They can bounce and show up around corners you don't expect.
Lisa Sherwin
VTM Public Relations
Phone: 503-297-3704
Fax: 503-297-1090
lsherwin@vtm-inc.com
Contact PCI-SIG
General and Administration:
PCI Special Interest Group (PCI-SIG)
5440 SW Westgate Dr., #217
Portland, OR 97221
Phone: 503-291-2569
FAX: 503-297-1090
administration@pcisig.com
Media & Analyst Contact:
Lisa Sherwin
VTM Public Relations
Phone: 503-297-3704
Fax: 503-297-1090
lsherwin@vtm-inc.com
---
Snail-mail or phone calls are the only things that'll make a difference.
The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet.
--Aristotle
Copied directly from the cease-and-desist:
"Your website indicates that you are an employee of IBM, a PCI-SIG member. We therefore request that you work through IBM to investigate the possibility of creating a similar database of PCI Vendor ID numbers which would be available on the official PCI-SIG website. In the meantime, however, be advised that PCI-SIG will not tolerate co-existence with your website, in its present form."
So basically this is an attempt to steal his content and have it added to their website. Or in other words, we love your content and we want it but we want it for free and if you argue we'll crush you. Sleazy bastards.
Maybe you should read it again... as to the sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the website by PCI-SIG
They "request" he work through his employer (IBM) to "investigate" basically handing over the database to PCI-SIG for their own website. They didn't say anything about him retaining control, IBM having control, or IBM publishing the website. They make it very clear that they do not want him to continue hosting the listing.
As for their claims of confusion in the marketplace, I find that very unlikely. His database has been around for a long time and no one has confused him as the PCI-SIG. This isn't the only database or listing of vendor and device IDs. Furthermore, no one can confuse these lists with an official PCI-SIG list as there isn't an official list.
Seems to me that they only are staking out legal grounds for complaining about the logo. Never mind that they object to the letters PCI - they don't claim legal ownership of the letters.
So the actual complaint is that PCI-SIG's lawyers are concerned that Boemler's site might be implying PCI-SIG is endorsing his material. I can't guess how many sites include a disclaimer - but if Boemler adds one, I'd think that would handle their complaint.
Maybe this is part of their complaint? But this is also playing dirty - they're threatening the guy's job. Not outright, but it's implied. I already don't like these lawyers.
But: (and with the IANAL) PCI-SIG is complaining about the use of the logo. Then they are putting forward the removal of the name and logo as a solution. Scare tactics, they want him to completely cave in ... but they haven't staked out enough ground (yet?) to demand the whole thing.
A witty [sig] proves nothing. --Voltaire
I remember reading an article way back when about the attorney at Rolls Royce whose only job was to go after trademark infringement. He was proud of the fact that he never had to file suit - often a friendly call was all that was needed to get someone to stop using the term "Rolls Royce". Usually the infraction was some advertising claim like "...the 'Rolls Royce' of chairs/towels/toilet plungers/etc..."
If a trademark is allowed to be used as a common term and the company doesn't take steps to protect the trademark then they can lose it. Witness "elevator", "escallator", "aspirin", etc. Reminding people that a word/phrase is a trademark is just part of the cost of having and keeping one.
This appears to be a similar case but instead of a friendly call to someone who is supporting the PCI cause but perhaps using a trademark without permission, they sic an a**h*** attorney on him - at least that is how it has been presented.
We have no way of knowing that this was the first contact. Perhaps all prior communications had been ignored. I'd like to see "the truth and ALL the truth" before judging.
~~~~~~~
"You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
In case you were wondering, the PCI SIG does have logo usage guidelines available on their site. They seem to be rather anal on the details. However, it looks like if you ask first, they let you use their logo and name.
o _Usage_Guide_and_License.zip.
Their logo usage guidelines are at:
http://www.pcisig.com/data/developers/PCI-SIG_Log
Yeah. I know. It's a zip. But I don't feel like slashdotting my server today.
I got this reply from Alan Deikman
To pci-sig list members and other individuals in the blind-cc to this message.
I am receiving quite a few e-mails about the situation with Jim Boemler's web site, which he has felt compelled to take down. I wasn't aware of this situation until the first of these e-mails arrived, and having looked into it I think the situation is as outrageous as obviously many of you do.
However, you should all be aware that neither I personally, or my company ZNYX Networks has anything to do with this situation. ZNYX Networks is not currently a member of the PCI SIG. We allowed our membership to lapse a number of years ago since it was obvious we were not going to be active in any standards setting efforts. As for me or any employee of ZNYX Networks, we are not now or ever have been an official of the SIG. If you read Mr. Boemler's web page more carefully, you will note that he does not list me as anything other than a possible contact, since he mentions he is not clear who should be contacted, other than the "shark" that is doing the legal work.
We have e-mailed Mr. Boemler (and cc'ed this message) to clarify our position, and I will offer any aid I can.
To clarify our position, we run the pci-sig mailing list as a general service to the community as a whole the same way Jim Boemler does (did) his web site. Back in 1992-3 when we first started, there were much fewer people around who could set up a mailing list so we did it. As with Mr. Boemler, we don't get paid for it, and we have offered to turn the work over to the SIG since we felt that it is more properly a SIG service, but so far there has been no positive reply. Now I am wondering if I am going
to get a present in the mail like Jim did! (I really don't think that
will be the case, since we don't do a web page, but the parallel is
evident.)
To any REAL PCI-SIG officials: would you care to post a comment?
Alan Deikman
ZNYX Networks, Inc.
Here's what Alan Deikman, the list admin for the pci-sig mailing list has sent to the pci-sig list as well as individuals who contacted him regarding this issue.
--
To pci-sig list members and other individuals in the blind-cc to this
message.
I am receiving quite a few e-mails about the situation with Jim Boemler's
web site, which he has felt compelled to take down. I wasn't aware of this
situation until the first of these e-mails arrived, and having looked into
it I think the situation is as outrageous as obviously many of you do.
However, you should all be aware that neither I personally, or my company
ZNYX Networks has anything to do with this situation. ZNYX Networks is not
currently a member of the PCI SIG. We allowed our membership to lapse a
number of years ago since it was obvious we were not going to be active in
any standards setting efforts. As for me or any employee of ZNYX Networks,
we are not now or ever have been an official of the SIG. If you read Mr.
Boemler's web page more carefully, you will note that he does not list me
as anything other than a possible contact, since he mentions he is not
clear who should be contacted, other than the "shark" that is doing the
legal work.
We have e-mailed Mr. Boemler (and cc'ed this message) to clarify our
position, and I will offer any aid I can.
To clarify our position, we run the pci-sig mailing list as a general
service to the community as a whole the same way Jim Boemler does (did) his
web site. Back in 1992-3 when we first started, there were much fewer
people around who could set up a mailing list so we did it. As with Mr.
Boemler, we don't get paid for it, and we have offered to turn the work
over to the SIG since we felt that it is more properly a SIG service, but
so far there has been no positive reply. Now I am wondering if I am going
to get a present in the mail like Jim did! (I really don't think that
will be the case, since we don't do a web page, but the parallel is
evident.)
To any REAL PCI-SIG officials: would you care to post a comment?
Alan Deikman
ZNYX Networks, Inc.
not registration. This would be why they take the trouble to point out how long they've been using it.
In fact, one of the steps necessary to register a trademark is showing that you're already *using* it as such.
This prevents the trademark equivilent of cybersquatting. You can't simply go through the dictionary and register every word. It just doesn't work like that.
This is a Good Thing(tm).
KFG
It's also cached "permamently" on the wonderful
WayBack Machine with the latest cached copy on October 2001 here
It will at least be there unless Jim (or lawyers) contact them to have it removed.
Everybody should grab your copies now so this information remains public and useful. And by all means give lots of credit to the hardworking Jim Boemler and just remove the offensive PCI(tm) logo.
In fact, this is one of the most amicable cease and desist letters I've seen. ...except that they have no legal justification beyond the mark for their claims.
."
This fellow is using PCI descriptively, not branding:
" Pursuant to 33(b)(4) of the Lanham Act, a defense to a claim of trademark infringement exists where:
(4) the use of the name, term, or device charged to be an infringement is a use, otherwise than as a mark . . . of a term or device which is descriptive of and used fairly and in good faith only to describe the goods or services of such party, or their geographic origin. . .
But more importantly, although I can't find a reference, you can't violate a trademark if you are not a commercial concern. I can call that box of facial tissues Kleenexes all day long and there's nothing legally that can be done about it.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Please feel free to direct your opinions on this matter HERE. If we don't like what they are doing, lets TELL THEM ABOUT IT instead of yelling at eachother in here. At least this way PCI-SIG will _know_ they are pissing their users off.
this sig was brought to you by the letter
Call him. Talk to him. Once an agreement is reached, bring in the lawyers to say, "Here is a contract for you to sign saying that you agree to the terms you already agreed to verbally."
There's your paper trail.
If negotiation above fails, THEN send in the lawyers. Lawyers aren't so bad when you're expecting them and they're simply finalizing something you've already negotiated.
My dad used to work for the intellectual property division of a large company. (Now retired, and consulting in the same field.) Almost all contact with other companies started with a phone call from him or a polite letter saying in effect, "Hey, you seem to be infringing one of our patents. Let's talk about this to see if we can reach an agreement." If that failed, THEN the lawyers were called in. But in 99% of cases, the lawyers were only called in to tie up loose ends and finalize an agreement after a few rounds of negotiations between non-lawyers.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
In fact, I've got a tradmark myself that's just about 8 years old and isn't registered. I've got another that's going on three *decades* old that I've never registered.
In point of fact, *most* trademarks, perfectly legitimate, are *never* registered and of those that are most are years, or even decades, old at the time of registration.
This is the norm.
Ok, it isn't the norm for big marketing outfits like GE or IBM who "brand" their own pee, but the PCI group isn't such a big marketing outfit.
Yes, it's true that the PCI group have registered the mark in order to make it easier to defend it on the national and internatioal level, but that isn't anything nefarious, that's the explicit *purpose* of mark registration. The fact that they've done it now is simply an indication that *now* is when their lawyers belive that such is relevant and worth the time, effort and money.
The reason most legitimate marks are never registered is because it is *never* relevant to defend them on a national scale, like, say, "Joe's Used Cars." However, there's nothing to say that Joe couldn't run his local used car lot for 40 years and then "make the big time" and go national, at which point he might then find it advantageous to register his 40 year old mark, for the first time.
KFG
You can still get the vendor/device list from Google's cache, though the last update in the cache is from October 28, 2002. The cache contains the main page, as well as some other useful data.
I suspect the wayback machine, while considerably slower, would have the CSV files and a few other items which the Google cache does not have.
Lastly, I agree with Jim that this is a really bad way for a non-profit group to act. I understand the pain of seeing someone you are supporting claim your hard earned work is somehow damaging to them, but suggesting that they'd like to have it anyway. Looking back it's easy to regret spending so much time on something which 'get[s] no respect'.
I hope that regardless of what PCI-sig claims or does, Jim finds a way to keep this valuable community resource available to those thousands who appreciate his effort, time, and money. I hope that it remains a free community resource. I hope that Jim isn't offended by Google's cache, and the possibility that others might continue his work, but I can't stand by and let someone destroy their creation to spite a third party, when that creation is of such value to so many others.
-Adam
The core of the problem is that PCI-SIG has little choice under trademark law -- unless they vigorously persue all infringement, they can potentially lose their trademark. Under trademark law, if the trademark holder knows of infringement and allows it, they loosen their grip on the trademark.
As an extreme example, if PCI-SIG did not pursue it legally in this case, and a few other cases, someone could re-assign pins on the PCI connector, and call their device a "PCI" card. When PCI-SIG went after them, the infringing firm could claim that "PCI" had become a generic term due to PCI-SIG's lack of protecting their trademark, and potentially win the case.
That's why phrases like "xerox machine" or "styrofoam cooler" sometimes result in C&D letters. It's not necessarily that Xerox does not want its name to be synonymous with copiers, but rather they must protect their trademark or lose it.
Let your voice be heard: http://www.pcisig.com/feedback
Anyone familiar with trademark and copyright laws understands the cease and desist letter for what it is...something the holders of PCI trademark MUST send to anyone who uses their trademark without first being granted the right to use it.
There is absolutely no reason to read malice into the C & D letter as Mr. Boemler has. The law is very clear on this point...if you don't *defend* your trademark vigorously as soon as you learn that others are using it without your authorization, you can lose your trademark rights. The C&D letter did NOT imply, in any way, that Mr. Boemler had to discontinue his website. The section requesting (note the lawyer's use of the word "request" rather than "demand") he work through IBM was only a suggestion. Its presence in the C&D letter obviously confused people who might be inclined to see its proximity to the previous demand to remove their trademark as an additional demand.
As other posters have indicated, all that Mr. Boemler needs to do is to stop using PCI in ways that violate their trademark.
http://pciids.sourceforge.net/
This site has another PCI device/vendor ID database.
Better save it while you can! There are download links available to get the entire table. Since the PCI-SIG has crushed the old yourvote.com site, there's no telling how long they will let this other site remain up, since it has similar content.
You might have the file already!
Download the latest version anyway, so your distribution is up to date. This file provides the human-readable names for tools such as lspci.
Dr. Demento On The 'Net!
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
There's been quite an outpouring of support for me and the Lists since I took them down two days ago. I'm gratified by that -- it's nice to know that what I've been doing has been of benefit to people.
I've spent the last hour or so talking with the President of the PCI-SIG. He's been very gracious, and has accepted responsibility for the lawyer's actions (though more due to his inaction than a desire to get the lawyer involved). We will be meeting next week to discuss how to proceed. While I still consider the net effect to be pretty outrageous (at least until measured against the rest of our litigious society), I want to stress that the President didn't start this ball rolling consciously, and is making a good faith effort to find a reasonable solution.
The SIG has been flooded by mail on this issue, enough that it's keeping them from doing their real work. They really have gotten the message from the PCI community at this point, so I'd ask you to think twice before sending them more mail on the subject. I'll keep the web site updated as things progress.
jim