Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Australian Linux Trademark Holds Water

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the trademarks-hard-at-work dept.

Seft writes "The Inquirer is running a story in response to the recent Linux trademark news in Australia which was previously covered on Slashdot. The story was dismissed as a hoax by many, but now it seems that Linus Torvalds is dead serious." John 'Maddog' Hall stated for the article that the move was not about getting a slice of anyone's action but purely to protect the quality of products that utilize the Linux name.

9 of 408 comments (clear)

  1. More at Groklaw by DarkkOne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At Groklaw they've got a pretty clear writeup as to everything behind it.

  2. They could have done a lot better... by inflex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I received the letter re Linux it quite honestly scared the daylights out of me. There was this letter that started out saying "this is a notice, not a letter of demand" but then it goes on talking about moderately large sums of money and potential legal fees.

    What was doubly annoying though was that the letter appeared to be sent out without checking to see if the recipient was applicable. None of the services or products that I had on my WWW site used the word "linux" in them, they simply happen to be able to /execute/ on linux too (so linux was listed as a "compatible OS".

    I still consider the email to be bordering very close to spam.

    Next time, a registered letter in the post after each site is checked for relevance would be a far more reputable manner of distribution.

    1. Re:They could have done a lot better... by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Drop a line to Linus and ask him if it is real. There's some kind of stipulation regarding fair use of a trademark, e.g. to reference the product's name in your documentation.

      The trademark, as I understand it, should only cover conducting trade under the mark "Linux"

      This is very close to what Redhat is doing. You can't use "Redhat" unless you've paid. Then you use "Fedora"... and then to confuse things a bit, they add some copyrighted materials to Redhat which are not Open Source so, I suppose for legitimate reasons, you can't start describing "Fedora" as "Redhat"

      I'd be surprised and disturbed if this were true. O.k., I'm already disturbed, but I'd be more disturbed.

      $5k to use a trademark is peanuts for the people who have the money to abuse it, and has nothing to do with protecting the Linux name. Cease and Desist letters to companies using Linux in unblessed or dangerous products seems more and appropriate (e.g. maybe revoking the trademark for kernel forks or kernels with unacknowledged and unblessed patches)

      Is Linus running low on cash?

  3. Not fair to very small projects by tvlinux · · Score: 5, Interesting
    IBM and Novell can afford $5000, a small linux project of just a few people $200 is a major burden.

    It costs about $100 per TVLinux show ( tapes, food, equipment), all paid by one person. TVLinux just wants to inform the TV public about open source and Linux. Do I drop 2-3 shows to pay for a "MARK". I think the rate should be $20-$50 for very small projects.

    TVLinux

  4. Lesson 2: Sense of Humour Needed by GanryuMVP · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Open Sauce" is a pun on "Open Source". The inquirer does that with almost everything. The Inquirer is generally pretty pro linux and linus but i'm sure they'll be slammed into the ground for daring to question linux/linus this one time. Seriously if Linus' plan is to show that companies acknowledge his trademark why not just ask for $1 each off them.

  5. Re:I'm scratching my head here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Poor journalism. That's what's going on.

    I'll wait until I hear a statement from Linus himself.

    Nothing to see here folks. Move along.

  6. Linus really approves of Jeremy Malcolm? by artifex2004 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    An awful lot of people in the previous ./ coverage had problems with this.

  7. Re:Lesson 1: Proof read by Directrix1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Probably. I read about a lot of crap from Maddog and stuff like that. But I have yet to see a verified write up IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM from Linus himself. Where is the proof that Linus is behind this?

    --
    Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
  8. Why make the small guy pay? by Andy_R · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why on earth is there an upper limit on contributions and no lower one? Wouldn't it be far easier and cheaper to administer this if only really big companies had to pay?

    Why not just say that if your Linux related turnover exceeds $1bn a year you have to pay it all, and therfore let IBM pick up the tab (or better still simply ask them to use their legal team to defend the trademark)?

    --
    A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a