Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux Trademark Rejected in Australia

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the minor-setbacks dept.

daria42 writes "Linus Torvalds' bid to have the word 'Linux' trademarked in Australia has failed, with the local intellectual property regulator sending his lawyer a vitriolic letter deriding efforts to provide evidence the trademark application was legitimate. In the letter, the regulator points out that information from Wikipedia and Google used by the lawyer to support the trademark application is simply not effective in making the case for a trademark to be registered."

6 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Breaking News by OSXpert · · Score: 4, Funny

    Netcraft Confirms it: Anonymous Coward dead at 52. Regardless of whether you agreed with his posts all the time, he was a frequent contributor of great information to slashdot. Truly an American Icon.

  2. Re:Misleading summary... by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Funny

    A misleading summary that allows the user to forward his anti-Wikipedia agenda? That's unpossible on slashdot!

  3. Re:The real problem with Linux by nagora · · Score: 4, Funny
    Reputable software companies such as Microsoft

    Why was this moderated "Troll" when it was clearly humour?

    TW

    --
    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  4. Re:Misleading summary... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Funny
    The entry from the Wikipedia encyclopaedia indicates 'Linux is a computer operating system and its kernel' ... demonstrating generic use rather than trademark use.
    About time for RMS to say, "see, I told you it should be called GNU/Linux all along". Never would've thought that silly dispute could have any practical meaning.
  5. Re:Using Wikipedia as a reference is a Bad Idea... by xappax · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unfortunately, as you have failed to demonstrate your authority as an expert in information integrity, I am forced to disregard your comments under the assumption that unless you have some sort of verifiable expert credentials, you're a babbling idiot. ;)

  6. Re:What about Internet Archive? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 4, Funny

    But, if Internet Archive is a valid legal source, then by all means Wikipedia is.

    Here's a scary thought- Slashdot as a valid legal source.