Slashdot Mirror
SSC Trademark Threats vs LinuxGazette.net
Zelligar writes "You may want to check into the brewing trademark issues between SSC/linuxgazette.com and the linuxgazette.net people - linuxgazette is a volunteer gazette, hosted by SSC for a while, and now SSC is taking it over - and threatening trademark litigation to boot!
Here is one story and another on the subject."
They are required by law to proactively defend their trademark or they lose the protection. This story brings me to conclude that it must be a slow news day.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
You can't just decide you don't like a site and try to make a copycat site using the same name and logo. That's like saying that I don't like Coke so I am going to make my own soda and call it Coke and use the same logos. Trademark laws exist to protect the customer as much as the company. By protecting the images and name of a company the consumer can be assured that what they are buying is the original. The same should hold true for something free and open.
I've read both aritcles and I'm still confused. What the heck is the point and why should I care? Its not the least bit interesting. If we could mod article submissions i would moderate this one -1 boring. If there was such a choice. I've submitted many articles that were much more interesting only to have them rejected. I guess this must be a slow news day.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Correct me if I'm wrong:
.. what if SCO started using something like "L1nux" for their new OS eh? :P
Summary:
1. Things changed at linuxgazette.com
2. Some contributers didn't like it (neither do I), and started their own site.
3. They were bright enough to use linuxgazette.net (of all places) for their new site. (even stealing the logo design)
4. linuxgazette.com doesn't like it, and tells linuxgazette.net to start their own site if they want, but not with the linuxgazette name.
5. linuxgazette.net doesn't agree, and the threats start to fly
(6. Profit?)
All very reasonable if you ask me
The path I walk alone is endlessly long.
30 minutes by bike, 15 by bus.
Apparently a group of volunteers has decided to fork the Linux Gazzette website and didn't bother to change the name of it. This doesn't sound like a big draconian company taking over a volunteer publication and beginning to sue everyone in site. It's more of a proper use of trademark law to me.
Except that the World Wildlife Fund was the litigation-happy one, and they won...
evil adrian
SSC owns the trademark, the "volunteer organisation" is made up of people who used to contribute to the SSC/linuxgazette.com site, and got angry that they migrated to a CMS, so they split and took the name. That sort of hijacking is what trademark law is for.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
Perhaps you'd like to read their side of the story?
Anything is possible given time and money.
There is a trademark registered to SSC. But the application date was Oct 28,2003. The very same day that Rick Moen notified Phil Hugh that they were moving the magazine accord to the LWN article.
SSC is playing dirty pool not the other around.
As posted below, more info is found here : http://lwn.net/Articles/58065/
:
.net folks for continuing to use the name.
A lot of people aren't reading the links - here is a summary (again)
Linuxgazette.com - originally founded by a group of volunteers.
SSC offered to host them, whee - works great.
SSC took over editing at some point
SSC changed the entire look/feel of the site, trashed the articles at will, and basically started locking out the original founders.
the founders took their content to linuxgazette.net
SSC, in the form of linuxgazette.com, is unhappy with the
IMHO - SSC should be ashamed for its bullying tactics. They should change the name of linuxgazette.com to something else, and give it back to the founders.
cince when does a company automatically get to claim ownership of something that others created?
SSC is trying to hijack the ownership of Linux Gazette. It was never EVER sold to them. they graciousally offered to host them.
SSC are being the asshats. they dont OWN Linux Gazette, they never OWNED linux Gazette, and nothing can change that fact.
SSC lost me when they made the Linux Journal into the ZiffDavis type crap it is today. the LJ used to be of the quality of Linux Format, a british Linux mag that is the best you can get today.
this crud they are trying to pull only amplifies what is wrong in SSC.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
If you had checked the USPTO website, SSC registered the trademark on October 28th, 2003, or after this dispute had begun. The Whois has the domain registration in 1997 by SSC after the Linux Gazette had been publishing for 2 years.
Issues have been copyright John Fisk, SSC, and the Linux Gazette group. All copyrights are also retained by the original authors.
Actual ownership of the trademark will be a hairy one to sort out.
The ______ Agenda
The first link on the main article are the SSC guys' comments on this, and the second link is the linuxgazette founders (.net) replies to his comments.
:
.com folks WILL DELETE any posting with the linuxgazette.net address in it. The censor stuff as they see fit.
Here is a link to the linuxgazette.net with their side of the story
Linux Gazette, Reborn
Here are two links to the linuxgazette.com forums - lots of discussion in here from both sides. Be warned that the
Forum: Anyone prefer the old site?
Forum: New Site!
Note that if you browse around the forums, a lot of things are broken. To view the forums in expanded format, most recent postings at the top, add &mode=2 to the URL. For example:
http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/view/104&mode =2
Another LWN article
History of this problem
What SSC has is a *application* for a trademark, and no doubt this will be a disputed application. I suggest that the linuxgazette.NET people write the PTO and explain their side of the story before the trademark publishes... although, they probably have several months to do so. Trademarks take quite a bit of time. SSC's attempt to do a last-minute trademark file and then sue is not only mean spirited, but stupid.o c&state=h prn5r.2.1
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=d
Word Mark LINUX GAZETTE
Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Publication of Journal. FIRST USE: 19950701. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19960801
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 78319880
Filing Date October 28, 2003
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Owner (APPLICANT) Specialized Systems Consultants, Inc. CORPORATION 2208 NW Market St Suite 407 Seattle WASHINGTON 98107
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
Because it teaches to clarify matters of trademark ownership early on. Right when LG started establishing a close relationship with SSC they should have made a contract that clarifies the question of who owns the trademark in case the relationship becomes sour.
As things are (without contract, and with no payment having been received by the original creators of LinuxGazette in exchange for trademark rights), I think that the linuxgazette.net folks are probably not guilty of any trademark violation when using the LinuxGazette name.
However, IANAL, and would be interested in reading comments from a lawyer on this matter.
Not true .... The World Wrestling Federation had an agreement with the World Wildlife Fund not to use the initials WWF in place of the name World Wrestling Federation. When they violated this agreement they were sued and ordered to stop using WWF per their prior agreement.
That seems to be on the Forkers Side - Just a hosting arangement.
but..
Seems to show that Fisk is turning it over to SCC. If that is the case then this is SCC's
You can seen in the write up where each side is getting their views
Net result, this could have all been handled with a little more tact on both sides. If SCC had just followed the wishes of the people who produced the article, this wouldn't have been a problem.
It should have been the creators of the work, the volunteers who should have been deciding on what direction the magazine should take. Not some marketroid who found way to suck $$, or techie who felt this was his site, and wanted to put up a CMS and/or excert his power.
Time travel is possible. We are quickly heading for 1984.
I too am sick of the greed happening here. Fact: Linux Gazette was started by people other than SSC. SSC later hosted it. That doesn't mean they own it, doesn't mean they own the name. If SSC can show some legal documents saying otherwise, please show them. But I doubt they have such. Unfortunatly, some overly trusting person permitted SSC to register and own the linuxgazette.com domain name. Given the likely lack of other documentary evidence, that may count for something if this actually goes to court. Hopefully the fact that Linux Gazette existed prior to SSC's involvement will count for more.
Another comment mentioned problems with their LJ subscription. I have subscribed since LJ was a thin little staple-bound magazine. I renewed my subscription yet again, a while ago, but the magazines stopped coming and I started getting bills. My AMEX card had been charged. So I figured no big deal, write email. I got a canned response stating that my payment had not been received. Responded that no, my card was charged, such and such date. No response. So I wrote a paper letter to their "customer service" address, with a copy of the AMEX statement and charge circled. No response. Sent another copy. No response. No magazines. Finally disputed it with AMEX, but too much time had passed.
Final resort: looked up SSC's corporate records, sent a certified letter to their registered legal address, with copy of prior letter/statement copy, and said please either send my money back, or I will sue you. That got a a nearly INSTANT response, and a phone call. But no apology, just a request to discuss "this issue." They restarted my subscription.
Given the poor customer service, the direction LJ has taken, and the behavior of SSC in this Linux Gazette issue, I won't be renewing my subscription either.
Larry
SSC does not own the trademark. They are asserting that they own the trademark, but this won't wash, because the people who started Linux Gazette used that name before they had any relationship with SSC, and they never assigned that name to SSC. The person with the right to the trademark is the one that first used it.