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.
Don't they have anything else better to do than close down an extrememly helpful website because it has three letters on there?
Could they still get you on that?
That's it, I'm going to boycott PCI. Only ISA, EISA, MCA, and AGP for me. Now, does anyone have a link to a motherboard manufacturer for a PIV that only has ISA slots?
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Remove the logo, and change the names to ``Computer Accessory Cards" or something else not copyrighted.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Jim must act quickly to claim the letters J I M as his own Intellectual property. Then we can find someone named Jim associated with the PCI trade group and countersue.
All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used.
And why do my posts start at 1 all of a sudden. The worlds gone mad, and I never noticed.....
A lot of users (like me) buy hardware often. If a device doesn't have official support for Linux, I am less likely to buy it... If the kernel doesn't even recognize it... well, they aren't gonna be selling me one.
I can't see how this group is going to come out ahead by doing this. The small amount of money the y (might) take in selling the information is going to be dramatically offset by the much larger amount of money their sponsors/patrons lose in sales.
Just change every instance of 'PCI' on the webpage and documentation to 'Peripheral Component Interconnect' with the first letter of each word much larger than the others.
-- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
It never ceases to amaze me how easily technology organizations shoot themselves in the foot. Let's punish the developer community making our standards-based hardware more valuable!
That also begs a question - does trademark allow you to prevent use of a word totally or just for marketing purposes. I seem to remember from school that suing someone claiming their product was "a PCI card" that wasn't licensed to do so is one thing, but saying "this card works in PCI bus systems" is quite another... and not actionalble.
-- $G
The trademark was granted only three months ago. It states on it that first use was Dec '94.
Does it really take eight years to file a trademark, or does this seem more like something they did specifically so they could sue other people? Maybe this guy is just the poor test case. Try it on him and if it works, go for a bigger fish...
(Score: -1, Stupid)
In the true slashdot tradition, I did not read the article, however:
* PCI is kind of like "kleenex"; It's a common-place word that is used to describe something, usually not a company or organization. If I recall correctly, there was a legal ruling about pretty much this same situation, the plantif being Kleenex. The court did not rule in Kleenex's favor.
* If we really want to get nitty-gritty about it, couldn't he just replace every instance of "PCI" in his site with "Peripheral Component Interconnect bus", thus (all be it wordy) technically describing the DEVICE, and not using the "trademarked PCI name"?
* How does this fall under the "please don't buy our hardware dept."??? It doesn't seem that PCI-SIG even SELLS hardware.
Check with a lawyer first, but it probably just comes down to.
If you look at the PCI-SIG home page you'll see a little animation mentioning that "Board members are members of the following companies...".
Guess who shows up at the top of the list when you follow the link?
Chair
Tony Pierce
Microsoft Corporation
Well. That explains a lot.
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.
This article needs to be on a few more websites,
I'd say change the name and thumb your nose at them... this is too valuable a service to lose to some copyright holder and their nitpicking attorneys.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
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...
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.
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
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.
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?
Because of the three Letters he choose to replace PCI, I'm not able anymore to access the web page from my workstation.
The proxy at my office have a rule to filter every page wich contains the XXX expression.
I'm trying to guess if moderators will find this comment interesting or funny
I'd suggest (IANAL) that he simply remove any copies of the PCI logo and put up a disclaimer that he has absolutely no affiliation with the PCI-SIG group other than the fact that they tried to shut down his website and hi-jack the database from him.
OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
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.
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
I won't post my name but I'm in charge of the domain for a fairly large transportation company. I won't explain what that means, but simply accept it.
Often, people will post information about our company and its operation. I don't know why they do it, and who cares.
When the marketing people find these sites, they immediately send a cease-and-desist. I try to explain that these people are customers and enjoy our site. That they help our brand by encouraging our customers and fans.
Marketing says "no, it dilutes our brand, there will be confusion blah blah blah" and they piss off our best customers via our legal staff. Its pointless. I think they need something to do with their spare time.
So I go out of my way to make sure marketing doesn't see the sites. Its stupid. It serves no one except someone thinks they're a fucking geniuses and they're not.
Sometimes you're giving people too much credit. Mostly people do dumb things because they're dumb.