Slashdot Mirror
SSC vs LinuxGazette.net Continued
An anonymous reader writes "To update an earlier story about the pending battle between SSC and LinuxGazette.net, it seems SSC has taken to officially asserting a trademark on the term 'Linux Gazette' and is asking them to relinquish the domain name. Interesting to note that LinuxGazette.net has issue 97 out, while SSC doesn't."
Specific examples of our use of this trademark go back to 1996
Ok, but the first issue on LinuxGazette.net is July 1995, so is this claim of precedence bogus or am I missing something big here with respect to the history of this dispute?
The only thing corporations understand is money. Cancel your subscription to Linux Journal until SSC abandons this foolhardy path. You can always resubscribe.
The time to act is now, not after SSC has used the courts to screw over the community.
Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
Can someone please clarify who www.linuxnj.com is/are and how they obtained this letter? I am not very happy with SSC over this situation but I would like to know who is providing this and what axes they have to grind. Verifying its authenticity would be helpful.
You shank my Jengaship!
But who had the trademark first,
That's the rub, so to speak.
It seems that SSC has registered the trademark, but did not do so until they were notified by the LinuxGazette people of the impending move.
Aparently SSC is claiming use of the trademark since 1996 (LinuxGazette issue 8), when they began providing hosting for the LinuxGazette volunteers. The LinuxGazette volunteers were using the trademark as early as 1995, and continued to do so after SSC so kindly offered to host the site for them.
IMHO, SSC should screw off. Providing a service to a volunteer org does not give you the right to dictate how they do business and especially does not give you ownership of the work that the org produces.
Read, L
Why is everyone bashing SSC ? Okay, fine, it's a corporation going after the little, defenseless contributor who most likely, didn't get paid while giving their labor away. But something you have to note, is that SSC have been running the Linux Gazette since 1996, and it was only this year that the contributors started linuxgazette.net. Check out the domain registration dates :
Domain name: LINUXGAZETTE.NET
Record Created on 12-Jul-2003.
Domain Name: LINUXGAZETTE.COM
Record created on 18-Oct-1997.
Basically, the unpaid contributors didn't like where the company was going with the product, and decide to start their own, only they used the same name. Now, IANAL, but if that is not trying to cause confusion in the market, I don't know what is. SSC is in it's right as it's been exploiting the Linux Gazette name for longer, no matter when they decided to register it as a valid trademark.
Why must the slashbots always criticized corporations. Sometimes the little guy is just being a jerk.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
This is an Open Development which will result in a Branded UNIX which will be freely distributed on the Internet in source and binary forms.
A lot has changed since issue 8 with respect to people's intentions....
So PROVIDED that SSC could get a court to agree that that handover was done in a way that gave them property rights to the magazine assets (which given the nature of it as a non-commercial volunteer based magazine where authors retain copyright would be mostly goodwill and any trademark rights) and effectively "owned" the magazine, the court would also likely agree that any claim the Linux Gazette contributors had to the name as an independent entity prior to SSC taking it over would either have been transferred as part of the handover OR have been lost due to disuse (since Linux Gazette has not been operated as a separate entity from SSC during that time and trademark rights are weakened and eventually lost if you don't use or protect your mark).
Note that the big sticking point is whether SSC were transferred any rights to begin with, and possibly whether they gained any rights (alone or as contributors alongside the rest of the people involved) as a result of their activities since they got involved.
If a court decides SSC was effectively the owner after it took over, then asserting '96 as the start time just serves to try to point out that their control over the name and publication was not challenged for many years, and that they were regularly using the mark in that time, which is important to assert the strength of protection they should be afforded.
Mote that I don't like what SSC has done here, and from what I've seen so far I like the Linux Gazette volunteers more than SSC - I'm just pointing out why the use of the name prior to 1996 doesn't necessarily mean a thing.
I remember when LG moved to SSC. The announcement was all about how SSC would be helping LG with hosting--nothing about the two merging. SSC is being underhanded which is a real shame considering that the Linux Journal is a decent magazine.