Slashdot Mirror
GNOME Project Seeks Donations For Trademark Battle With Groupon
Drinking Bleach writes Groupon has released a tablet-based point of sale system called Gnome, despite the well-known desktop environment's existence and trademark status. This is also not without Groupon's internal knowledge of the GNOME project; they were contacted about the infringement and flatly refused to change the name of their own product, in addition to filing many new trademark applications for theirs. The GNOME project is seeking donations to help them in a legal battle against these trademark applications, and to get Groupon to stop using their name. They are seeking at least $80,000 to challenge a first set of ten trademark applications from Groupon, out of 28 applications that have been filed.
Unless Gnome is selling PoS systems, how would this infringe their trademark?
I'm not a lawyer, but a POS and a desktop environment don't seem like overlapping categories for Trademark purposes.
How would this be infringement? GNOME's trademark lists only the following goods and services:
Downloadable computer software tools and libraries used for the development of other software applications; downloadable computer software development tools; downloadable computer software for creating and managing a computer desktop; downloadable computer software for use as a graphical user interface; downloadable computer software for word processing, database management, and use as a spreadsheet
None of which this tablet system falls under other since this isn't "downloadable computer software". And:
Computer software development; computer software design; computer programming for others; technical consulting services in the field of computer software; licensing of intellectual property
Nor this.
I know this will not be popular of me to say, but this looks like IP trolling.
How come in the USA with its huge surplus of lawyers, they aren't some willing to take the case for free, in exchange for a percentage of damages against a publicly traded company like GroupOn?
Because, if GNOME prevails, there wouldn't be damages, just the rejection of Groupon's trademark applications.
A similar story:
"The Phoenix name was kept until April 14, 2003, when it was changed because of a trademark dispute with the BIOS manufacturer, Phoenix Technologies (which produces a BIOS-based browser called Phoenix FirstWare Connect). The new name, Firebird, met with mixed reactions, particularly as the Firebird database server already carried the name. In response, the Mozilla Foundation stated that the browser should always bear the name Mozilla Firebird to avoid confusion with the database software. Continuing pressure from the Firebird community forced another change,[1] and on February 9, 2004 the project was renamed Mozilla Firefox (or Firefox for short)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Firefox
Just because you don't agree with the desktop environment's choice doesn't mean that they are in the wrong here, or that this wouldn't have lasting implications in the open-source community. Even if you aren't using Gnome-shell, chances are very strong that you are running something requiring GStreamer or GTK 2/3 that comes from the Gnome project. Open-source products have been bullied in the past (see the Firefox example above, or $4/device to Microsoft for their "development" of Android) by well-funded campaigns that seek to ride the coattails of a community-oriented product for their own profit. Dozens of community sites, Gnome-look.org, Worldofgnome.org, etc. and system libraries stand to lose of Groupon presses their trademark.
This is an assault on open-source software, and regardless of what you feel about the direction that Gnome is taking, it the project is still very relevant and this action should not be tolerated. It's okay to debate among the community about the direction of the project, but the community needs to have clear resolve to combat outside threats to its right to exist.
Do you realize that XFCE uses Gtk+ and a host of other software developed by GNOME?
GNOME (the desktop environment) has been used as the point-of-sale operating system on cash registers at Lowe's Home Improvement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowe%27s) since the early 2000's. You can still walk around their stores and see Gnome 1.x with Enlightenment as its window manager on their _cash registers_ in 2014. That alone should be grounds for the GNOME Project's case.
Originally GNU Network Object Model Environment, but I think this has been deemphasized since at least 2.0.
Trademarks are usually valid within a specific field of use.
Yes, and the mark's specified goods and services don't overlap with this PoS system.
But the more famous the mark becomes, the broader the judge will construe exclusivity.
GNOME isn't that famous.
For example, something like "COCA-COLA" is so famous that Coke's lawyers will have no trouble making a prima facie case for dilution if the mark is used for any other product.
Wrong. are numerous registered marks that are "COCA-COLA" that are not from the Coca-Cola company.
Mozilla had to rename Firebird to Firefox even though database software and web browser software aren't exactly the same field.
But the actual registered goods and services for the mark could have overlapped.
But whether the "GNOME" mark applies to useful computer software in general or to GUI frameworks in particular is for a judge to decide after the GNOME project's counsel presents its case.
This isn't a GUI framework. It's a tablet PoS system. It does not fall under any of GNOME's registered goods and services.
Well if we were being informed on the history of GTK we would know that GTK was developed by The GIMP so they could have a pretty GUI for their nice image manipulation software, then Gnome happend to like that GIMP Tool Kit and used it to create Gnome, but whatever floats your boat.
That is exactly not what that message says. He starts:
Important disclaimer: I am now stating the de-facto situation, not the
situation I wish for.
and continues:
GTK 3 at this point really is just the GNOME toolkit. There is absolutely zero
involvement from anyone else.
He's complaining that nobody else helps develop GTK, not saying that GNOME doesn't want other people to use GTK.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Gnome is a poorly managed charity which has diverted most of its revenue away from its chartered purpose (as listed in its IRS Form 990) to become a SJW cause. According to its 2013 990 report, Gnome had $506,477 in expenses, while having only $201,034 in revenue. It has high administrative costs -- the pay of the executive director was $91,180 plus another $56,111 in compensation from the organization and other outside sources. The amount spent on its biggest event promoting actual free software, GUADEC, comes to $35,770, while the Women's Outreach Program got $265,369. A program that doesn't even require that the software produced by sponsored participants to be related to Gnome. This not what the Gnome Foundation was created for. In fact, Gnome Foundation is just really a public-relations front for Red Hat. If Red Hat is worried about Gnome's foot trademark, then let them fund the lawsuit. Gnome already has retained a former Red Hat IP lawyer for the case.
For example, something like "COCA-COLA" is so famous that Coke's lawyers will have no trouble making a prima facie case for dilution if the mark is used for any other product.
Wrong. are numerous registered marks that are "COCA-COLA" that are not from the Coca-Cola company.
Your link doesn't work. And a search on TESS for "coca-cola" as the full mark and "NOT Coca-Cola Company" as the applicant returns one hit, an abandoned application by a pro se "sovereign citizen": "Harvey W. Wiley DBA We The People INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES 900 Georgia Ave Chattanooga TENNESSEE 37402". Searching for "coca-cola" in the description of the mark with "NOT Coca-Cola Company" as the applicant returns one hit, a design for an author's business card that uses the same red color as Coke: "The color(s) coca-cola red is/are claimed as a feature of the mark. The mark consists of a coca-cola red kneeling fisherman." But it's also abandoned.
Finally, searching for "coca-cola" anywhere in the application, but NOT the Coca-Cola Company as the applicant turns up a pile of applications... from people with addresses at "Coca-cola Plaza" or "Coca-cola Park" in various cities - i.e. tenants in Coke's industrial parks. Is that what you searched for and thought you found?
...to name one of the few things Coca Cola doesn't stick their name on yet AFAIK...
Couldn't resist.