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."
Don't worry. SCO will sue SSC out of business. For one thing, it is involved with Linux. For another, it sounds too much like SCO anyway (both in name and action)
There can only be ONE company that files frivolous lawsuits about Linux!!!!
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.
Who owns the trademark?
Is it a valid trademark?
If the volunteer organization used the name linuxgazette before it was registered by SSC, it is likely not a valid trademark.
I love to see litigation happy companies lose and come out behind.
The Word Wresting Federation against the World Wildlife Fund was fun.
I have recently opened a new site entitled, Slashdot, News for Geeks, Stuff That REALLY matters.
Celebrities are like ads, if we all ignore them, they'll just go away.
See http://linuxgazette.net/ for the traditional Linux Gazette. Ah, feel at home? Good.
http://linuxgazette.net/issue96/reborn.html is part of their side of the story.
Personally, I think the CMS site sucks and goes against the spirit of what Linux Gazette has been for years.
Anything is possible given time and money.
Mine lapsed because they put the overseas prices (I'm in the UK. Hi.) up by 40% one year.
--
This sig is inoffensive.
If your legal department is on the offensive, you may need to lay off the marketing department.
If anyone wants to make this even more ridiculous, the linuxgazette.org domain name is still up for grabs. It would be funny to see what the forkers think of their site being forked.
If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
Because I know from another story that Open Source people love them feuds. :)
Vincent J. Murphy
Spandex Justice
The new site seems to be broken, you can't read the comments. The URLs (eg http://www.linuxgazette.com//131#131) go nowhere, and the expand/flatten/whatever the comment tree buttons do nothing (I reckon I'm in caching/cookie hell here but its exactly the same in both IE6 and Moz1.5). After figuring out that the site uses drupal as its CMS, I realized the URLs should be, e.g.
3 1
/.ed right now.
http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/view/134/131#1
(for a comment on node 134). Looks like their URL rewriting is screwy. Anyway, hope this helps folk who wanted to read the site when it comes back up, seems
Just come up with a better name announce it on Slashdot with the URL and all is good. SSC can rot in hell with the "Linux Gazette" name.
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!
Mike
Hmmmm....
I'd say bad form from the forkers...
They themselves say something along the lines of
Mozaic begat Netscape which begat Mozilla...
Corrrect, but as far as I remember, each change meant another logo and another name!!
These guys, whatever there motives, simply ripped of the LinuxGazette name and artwork!
Fork the Gazette? Sure! Keep the form factor? No problem! Tell people to switch allegiance? OK. But hey, call it Linux Newspaper or so and get your own logo!
I purchase whatever Linux mags I can find here, whenever they come out, as a show of support for them. They seem to disappear regularly, though.
More on topic, we really need to know (and yes I have read both sides of this story) whether, when SSC started paying the contributors, if there was something in their contract(s) ahnding over the trademark. If there was, then this is a dead issue and the old guard is in the wrong. If SSC was paying for the editing, and if they had a standard "all production by the employees belongs to the company" clause, then the new linuxgazette.net folk might be out of luck.
As a reference, I give you the "Famous Amos" cookie company, based out of my home state. When Amos got disgusted, quit, and started a new company, he had to name it "Noname" and be blurred out of the commercials because his picture and name were trademarked to the company that took him over.
Put identity in the browser.
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.
Google has spoken - LinuxGazette.com is the winner.
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
I just canceled my subscription to Linux Journal. It's a good magazine, but I'm sick of corporations acting like predators.
Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
I have the feeling that Linux has become generic i.e. you can use it in any way you want.
Furthermore, Linus registered Linux in Nice category 9, i.e. computer and scientific equipment, not publications.
Linux Week is a registered trademark for a publication and they didn't have to license anything from Linus (you cannot register a trademark that contains another trademarked element on the basis of a license. Either your mark is distinctive or it is not. A license allows you to use a mark but not to create another registerable one)
SSC filed for a trademark on 28 October 2003. WHICH IS A BIT LATE to start suing Linux Gazette.
I'm not sure of the Linux Gazette entity status and whether it exists as the body of defectors or as something owned by SSC but if its the second, then prior usage will grant the Linux Gazette trademark to them and as a result - only they can use it.
Another LWN article
History of this problem
Such "thugs" are required to vigorously defend their trademarks or they can be nullified.
Douglas P. Price
This is the same Linux Journal that can not get my subscription to me. I have emailed them, but I get no response. I have like 18 months left on my sub, but the just ignore me.
What has happened to them? They used to be great!
Why is it that everyone that has previously supported the linux community seems to becoming complete asshats, and are trying to "take over" the efforts of a hard-working community for their own profit? Just because something is "free" does not mean that you can steal it and call it your own. Copyright still applies. What rookies.
SCO, now LinuxGazette, and I don't know how many others. What clowns.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Such "thugs" are required to vigorously defend their trademarks or they can be nullified.
These particular thugs registered their trademark on the exact same day, 10/28/2003, that the non-corporate-lackeys among them notified SSC of their intent to split. If that alone doesn't call the validity of their trademark into question (or even make registering it a prosecuteably fradulent act), I don't know what would.
Good catch, all. I forgot to look at the date.
All's true that is mistrusted
Is this the case I am reading about?
It seems that the heart of the creative effort was at first merely hosted by SSC. But then SSC made contributions of its own. Does making contributions constitute ownership? If so, what portion of ownership is warranted? Even if they can own "part" of the trademark, how can they justify an assertion of wholely owning something they did not create from the beginning?
Clearly there is more than meets the eye, but I feel there is essentially a common clash between commercial desires and those of serving a community. This is commonly mirrored by many things such as the community internet being overtaken by commercial interests at every turn.
I do not wish to "take sides" but I think it is important to note that since the presence of the Amish in Pennsylvania has helped to maintain the level of tourist income, I think it would be appropriate to hang signs advertising other business activities on all "public faces" of the Amish community. The Amish, after all, owe a good part of their success to their popularity as a tourist attraction. It is only fair that they "give back" by permitting advertisers to hand huge signs from the backs and sides of their carts, wagons, horses and barns. We do not feel that a sign reading, "This barn raised, in part, by Rice-a-Roni(tm) the San Francisco Treat!(tm)" would be at all out of place or out of the question.
According to a GoDaddy WHOIS request:
8 6362381480s @ultsearch.com9 677
.com, .net, and .org are taken. Still can take .us, .biz, etc
Domain ID:D92984598-LROR
Domain Name:LINUXGAZETTE.ORG
Created On:10-Dec-2002 10:34:35 UTC
Last Updated On:24-Nov-2003 21:53:31
UTCExpiration Date:10-Dec-2003 10:34:35 UTCSponsoring Registrar:R52-LROR
Status:
OKRegistrant
ID:106
Registrant Name:Ultimate Search
Registrant Street1:GPO Box 7862
Registrant City:Central
Registrant State/Province:HKRegistrant
Postal Code:NARegistrant
Country:HKRegistrant
Email:dn
Admin ID:10686362384500
Admin Name:DNS Support
Admin Street1:GPO Box 7862
Admin City:CentralAdmin
State/Province:HKAdmin
Postal Code:NAAdmin
Country:HKAdmin
Phone:+852.8522537
Admin Email:dns@ultsearch.com
Tech ID:10686362391430
Tech Name:DNS
SupportTech Street1:GPO box 7862
Tech City:CentralTech
State/Province:HKTech
Postal Code:NATech
Country:HKTech
Phone:+1.85225379677
Tech Email:dns@ultsearch.com
Name Server:NS1.ULTSEARCH.COM
Name Server:NS2.ULTSEARCH.COM
Looks like some porn merchant took it. However, only the
I'm going to have to agree with those that modded my original post down. It wasn't "informative". It was the exact opposite of informative, a question. However, I'm not sure why it was modded flamebait that seems a little harsh. But what ever is neeeded to bring it back down is fine. The posters who responded to me, now those are informative posts. Mod them up, not me.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
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
The reason we registered the trademark was to protect it. That is, if we hadn't registered it, someone else could have and the process to establish the rightful owner would have been much more complicated.
I'm sorry that some of the LG volunteers did not see our changes as progress and did not want to work with us to make LG a better site. I respect their right to start their own publication--just not their right to take the name with them.
In the mean time, we are putting a lot of effort into the new site. We are preserving the monthly edition concept but we also think people having to wait a month to see an article or get an answer is not what computers are all about. Based on the survey, the majority of the people responding agree with our direction. Or, more accurately, our direction reflects the input from the majority of the survery responses.
Phil Hughes, Linux Journal
Ownership is important, but words convey meaning...
Definitions:
gazette: A newspaper; a printed sheet published periodically; esp., the official journal published by the British government, and containing legal and state notices.
journal: A daily register of the ship's course and distance, the winds, weather, incidents of the voyage, etc. (c) (Legislature) The record of daily proceedings, kept by the clerk. (d) A newspaper published daily; by extension, a weekly newspaper or any periodical publication, giving an account of passing events, the proceedings and memoirs of societies, etc.; a periodical; a magazine.
If SSC wanted to run a Content Management System (CMS) I think that is a great idea. But Linux Gazette has always been in a magazine format. Static pages. In fact there is Debian package that allows you to grab back issues to download onto your laptop if you like.
But a CMS is not a magazine, or a gazette. In fact it would have made MUCH more sense for SSC to convert Linux Journal into an CMS format than what they did.
The other thing that is bothersome about this (once you dig a little deeper) is that the decision to convert to a CMS format and the selection process for the software to be used happened almost over night. The CMS was put in place with obvious bugs an omissions and it was clearly still in the R&D phase (still is in fact) with many features not quite working as they would like yet. Why would you throw out a perfectly working format and put something in its place that was so clearly still under heavy development?
Regardless of who ends up owning the words "Linux Gazette" the SSC handling of this thing is at best "ham handed", and hardly what you would expect from an established publishing company.
I have been a regular reader of Linux Journal and Linux Gazette. I plan to suspend my purchasing of the former until the fate of the latter becomes more clear. Frankly, most CMS format publications suck. Slashdot is on of the few exceptions. SSC should have done the CMS experiment on the side and left the Linux Gazette format alone at least until the new thing had established itself. To say that the Linux Gazette has forked is not quite analogous to what has happened. If someone took KWORD and gutted the program and turned it into an astrology program I don't think you would call that a fork, I think you would call it a dumb idea. I think what SSC did was dumb, and the community needs to see that it is in their best interest to set it right again.
If the "renegade" bunch have to ditch the Linux Gazette name... I'll still follow them. The "new" SSC site is a nightmare. I have a major preference for the format on the linuxgazzette.net site... not only that, but they provide a palm friendly download of the current issue :) and the offline browsing version has always been a winner for me.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
the process to establish the rightful owner would have been much more complicated.
The "rightful owner"? SSC hosted it, for which you built up a sizeable karma reserve. However, the title of "editor" for a pool of volunteer-submitted articles strikes me as little more than an honorific. "Okay, you guys will host our work, you can appoint your own "Grand Pubah of the Linux Gazette" if you want to.
But owned? How about the four(?) months the LG existed before SSC became involved? I suppose that means nothing, even though in patent-law (which I know doesn't apply here, but I want to give a legal/moral analogy) it would count as prior art?
I'm sorry that some of the LG volunteers did not see our changes as progress and did not want to work with us to make LG a better site.
Perhaps public perception differs from the reality in this case. But from material available at the two LG sites, it would appear that SSC basically wanted to turn the LG into little more than another blog site, which after this mess came out to the public, SSC decided to reverse around 90% of the changes. If such an improvement, why revert to almost the same as before the schizm?
Blogs and newssites have their uses. But an actual, formalized journal-format has something both lack - Permanance. The web has a major shortage of that, which LG provided. If I want a blog or newssite, I'll read K5 or NewsForge, respectively. People read LG for an entirely different reason, which SSC apparently intended to eliminate. Thus the backlash.
As I said, SSC has built up some karma for doing the Linux community such a service for so long. But in case you haven't kept up on your Slashdot reading, most of us REALLY dislike corporate BS like this. Your actual authors, the people who give you something to publish, decided you no longer served the best interests of the LG. So while you may actually win the name, your/their readers will follow the content, not the name.
That said, I have no particular personal interest in the outcome of this. I'll read both LG sites for a while, and see how this turns out. If SSC appears more-or-less honest in their intent, I sincerely wish you well. I can't say, though, that I currently have a lot of hope for that.
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
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
-2: Linux Gazette crew makes a nice community publication ...
-1: They publish on their own for years.
0: SSC offers to host the publication for no fee.
6: SSC claims trademark ownership of "LinuxGazetee" because they feel that hosting it for years somehow entitles them to this.
7: Idiots post on Slashdot without knowing anything.
8: Profit ???
I'm sorry I didn't include all the links...
/. would do the research and such. oops.
I horked the submission... First time I ever felt strongly enough to make one, and I assumed that
Now I know better, witness the multiple replies I have posted with better summaries, information and far better links!
I would be shocked and surprised if a hosting company could acquire trademark rights to a web site merely by hosting the web site. If this were so then Rackspace.com would find itself right now in possession of a very large number of trademark rights. Now I agree that SSC provided free hosting instead of paid hosting, but I fail to see how the fact that SSC provided its hosting for free changes anything.
Likewise, although I realize SSC has contributed much effort to LG since SSC got involved with LG, I do not see these contributions establishing any trademark rights either. After all, *I* have contributed to LG before as well, and you don't see me going around asserting that I have trademark rights to LG.
SSC should do the right thing and admit that it has no trademark rights to the name LG, relinquish the linuxgazette.com domain to the founders of LG, and publish their CMS under some other name. It is clear to me that LG is not a CMS, never has been a CMS, and that SSC is going to have a very difficult time arguing that the CMS is truer to the LG name than the rival publication.
I should also point out that even if SSC somehow manages to win a legal case and keep the LG name, it will be blackballed by a sizable fraction (possibly even the majority) of the linux community, who, like me, view the founding volunteers of LG as the true keepers of the LG torch.
With apologies for the original state of the posting, here is a new, revised one with full links (at least, most of them).
.net folks for continuing to use the name. Sadly, SSC tried to trademark the name on Oct 23, 2003, the same day the founders announced the Fork.
Summary:
1. Linuxgazette.com - originally founded by a group of volunteers.
2. SSC offered to host them, very generous and kind.
3. SSC voluntarily took over editing at some point.
4. Recently, SSC changed the entire look/feel of the site, trashed the articles at will, and basically started locking out the original founders.
5. the founders took their content to linuxgazette.net
6. SSC, in the form of linuxgazette.com, is unhappy with the
LWN: The Linux Gazette Forks
LWN: Linux Gazette
LG: Linux Gazette, Reborn
LG: Histoy of Linux Gazette
SSC: Publisher's comments
SSC: Reply to publisher's comments
SSC: Forum: Anyone prefer the old site?
SSC: Forum: New Site!
Note on the forum links, to change the sort method, you have to edit the URL. The sort the link goes to is the standard one, to change it to the expanded list, use mode=2, etc.
who *legally* has the right to the "Linux Gazette" name seems controversial at the very least. that being the case this is how i would approach resolving the situation.
if i were the Answer Gang i would offer SSC the option of having the Linux Gazette name in exchange for a prominent announcement (on the front page of linuxgazette.com) that due to a disagreement some of the contributors have created a new zine at linuxwhatever.???.
this would allow the readers to choose what to read.
if SSC doesn't agree to this i might persist in asserting ownership of the Linux Gazette name only as long as i didn't have to put any energy into doing so. if actions from SSC resulted in legal pressure to stop using the name i would let it go instead of putting up a fight (even though i might win the fight).
i would also request support from readers to publicize the name and location of the new zine. i would encourage readers to contact other readers and linkers to the Linux Gazette and point them to the new website.
in my personal experience a name is only a pointer to something that is real. when my good friend changed her name from alexis to ocean i didn't go looking for another friend named alexis.
readers were drawn to the Linux Gazette because of the writing not because of the name. there may be a lull in readership for the Answer Gang due to a domain name change but this probably won't be for very long. it actually seems like a great opportunity for the Answer Gang to manifest something that is more in line with their visions.
if there is a burden that is incurred as the result of the domain name change i suspect that there are some readers that would love to help minimize this burden.
if you are part of the Answer Gang and are reading this i encourage you to ask yourself: will fighting to keep the Linux Gazette name bring me joy? will rebirthing our zine bring me joy?
ask yourself these questions irrespective of whether or not you think each is achievable. if you choose to fight for the Linux Gazette name ask yourself these same questions again a day or a week later. if you regularly check-in with yourselves as this name controversy unfolds you will less likely find yourselves caught up in an activity that is draining.
peace
P.S.
it isn't a surprise to me that the SSC is behaving the way it is. it is a traditional top-down hierarchical for-profit organization. it's raison d'etre is to make money (i understand that this may not have been the reason the SSC was created). if you remember this then all of their current actions make a bit more sense.
The new site sucks. The old site was better. I don't care what goes on behind the scenes for how content is managed, but the generated layout is crap. So it seems "CMS" means Content Mangling System.
And look at that sponser ad ... "Microsoft Hosting Provider of the year ... Rackspace.Com" ... the place 20% of my spam comes from ... the place that totally ignores all spam complaints and lets spammers continue operating.
So yeah, I can understand why the fork; SSC are doing things that really annoy me. But Theo didn't call his OS N3TBSD when he forked away from NetBSD; he picked a new name and called it OpenBSD. So I do think those who decided to make their own should have at least come up with a new name.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
A group of volunteers that are the major source of content, if not the sole source of content are dissatisfied with the hosting companies decision to change the look/feel of the site it volunteered to host. (Note, hosting someone else's site does not give you editorial control over it, nor ownership of it!)
/. trolls bad-mouth the content authors for wanting credit for their work, and laud the Hosting company for trying to own the tradmark that other people have built over time. (Note, this is not an employment issue, where the employer claims IP and copyright to all works created by the corporate serf. This is a site that was published under OPL and similar licensing. Open Publication )
These volunteers have build and shaped the site for most of its existance.
The hosting company decides that it owns all the content on the site, and the copyright to all content on the site, no matter what the authors say. Hosting site goes as far as stripping copyright and removing authorship credit to articles as it reformats said articles to the new & improved format. Mirrors have the original articles in original format, some of these get changes in a alleged attempt to erase all references to the original copyright and formats.
The Authors rebel, take their IP find new hosting site, respectfully request transefer of the Domain names to new hosting site, and register a DOTNET version of the domain in addition to the DOTCOM they with transfered.
The Hosting company threatens for return of said IP that does not belong to it, corrects some but not all copyright infringement, and starts a FUD campaign.
Slashdot Non-RTFA-ACs complain about the authors and copyright holders fighting for their rights.
The registration date is October 28, 2003, even though Linus Gazette has been publishing since '95. Sounds like SSC decided to register the trademark only when they realized they had a problem. That registration might be succeptible to challenge.
Or everyone could just let SSC, Inc. buy their $300 10-year (alleged) limited monopoly over a commercial brand identity (service mark), and just keep publishing Linux Gazette, because the one doesn't have a lot to do with the other.
Our non-commercial monthly community magazine (Linux Gazette) moved by unanimous decision of its staff to http://linuxgazette.net/ as of the November 2003 issue. For seven of the preceding eight years, SSC, Inc. was kind enough to assist LG by giving it hosting and allowing some of its staff to assist production during work hours, for which we are quite grateful.
Our decision to move was motivated by a number of things, including SSC's unexplained, unannounced, retroactive deletions from prior issues' articles, its stripping of authors' copyright notices and substitution of their own corporate one, and its proclaimed plans to make LG cease being a magazine and cease having editors, turning it into solely a dynamic Web site.
After our move of the magazine to new quarters, SSC to our astonishment produced a November issue purporting to be Linux Gazette, immediately after our November issue went to press. (This was surprising because we'd been told they intended that monthly magazine issues cease.)
To our further surprise, SSC, Inc. suddenly asserted posted "TM" symbols next to its copies of our magazine's logo, and started asserting in public that it owned trademark over the magazine "brand" identity. This was surprising because (1) SSC didn't start SSC, (2) SSC's assistance of founder John M. Fisk was specifically so that LG could remain a non-commercial community magazine, and (3) trademark is a commercial property right.
We were further surprised to learn that SSC, the day following our notifying SSC of our departure, filed a US $300 fee and application form with the USA Patent and Trademark Office asking for recognition of "Linux Gazette" as a service mark of SSC, Inc., asserting they made first use of it in commerce in 1996. This was surprising for a number of reasons: (1) The magazine was founded in 1995, not 1996 (by John M. Fisk, not SSC). (2) To our knowledge, the "mark" has never been used in commerce (and the whole idea of SSC helping was to keep the magazine non-commercial). (3) The correct symbol to use to claim a service mark (the term for brand insignia of commercial services as opposed to commercial goods) is "SM", not "TM".
Our understanding of trademark law is that, if the court judges a trade/service mark to be legitimately your property (which seems unlikely in this case) and if it's held to be validly established in commerce (ditto), then you're empowered to enjoin competing commercial interests from using that mark to sell a competing product/service, within the same trade/industry segment, in any way likely to confuse customers into thinking you (rather than the competitor) produced or endorsed it. The alleged owner is obliged to enforce this claim through civil litigation (or risk losing the mark, through it becoming generic). Federal registration of a claimed mark gives broader geographical coverage of this right.
Please note that LG (at linuxgazette.net) remains a completely non-commercial magazine, which would appear to put its operations outside the normal scope of trademark law (leaving aside questions of validity and ownership). So far, we've received no legal threat from SSC, Inc., which is gratifying -- and we're concentrating on continuing to publish the magazine as we have for eight years. The December issue -- with a CSS stylesheet facelife and nicer logo -- will appear in a few days. As always, we're delighted
Well, since they were providing hosting and SSC employees as editors I can see how they'd feel they had editorial control.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
Feel welcome to bitchslap them.
The other shoe has just dropped: SSC evidently feels its easier and cheaper to try to seize our domain than to file a trademark-infringement lawsuit, and they've just delivered a cease & desist letter to our domain registrar, citing their bogus trademark claim. We are of course not sitting down for that, and are drafting a response just in case SSC causes the ICANN UDRP to be applied (as may be their intent). You can see a recent version of that draft at http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/view/134/228#228 (unless SSC deletes the post).
And, yes, we have indeed posted the demand letter to the EFF's http://www.chillingeffects.org/ Web site. It'll be case #983, when available for display, there.
Rick Moen
Contributing Editor, Linux Gazette