[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-community
Subject:    Re: KDE Apps name trademarks
From:       Michael Reeves <reeves.87 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2020-07-09 15:42:28
Message-ID: CANp6eRnLzHQG_fqwF=u1NX3P9HXDNdxJJRESnY+3yTWgAP6iqw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

As current  maintainer of kdiff3 I would oppose trade mark enforce ment.
Unless we have clear proof this is an altered version. I am perpared to
push out my own free download if noone in this community wants the job.
That will end the current problem quite nicely.

On Thu, Jul 9, 2020, 10:27 AM Jack <ostroffjh@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> On 7/9/20 9:48 AM, Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> > On 2020-07-09 14:18, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> >> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 12:29, Christoph Cullmann
> >> <christoph@cullmann.io> wrote:
> >>
> >>> You might be able to do that, but as soon as you start to try to
> >>> keep
> >>> people
> >>> from using the names, the cost-free, bureaucracy-free and layer free
> >>>
> >>> zone ends.
> >>
> >> Sending an e-mail to the Microsoft store doesn't need to cost
> >> anything, and it would have more effect if there can be a claim of
> >> trademark.  Claiming copyright infringement as discussed on this
> >> thread is also sensible but it does need more work and will need at
> >> least the cost of buying kdiff3 from their store.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > sending just a mail will for sure not be enough, as the license allows
> > anybody to upload our stuff there.
> >
> > You can start to claim that the name is trademarked but then this will
> > only work if the other party doesn't claim it is not or that we don't
> > have
> > a policy that forbids to upload something with that name + get money
> > for it.
> I think the suggestion of a letter to Microsoft was about the potential
> copyright violation, not about trademark.  They could confirm whether or
> not there is an offer of source code within the package without having
> to buy it.
>

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<div dir="auto"><div>As current   maintainer of kdiff3 I would oppose trade mark \
enforce ment. Unless we have clear proof this is an altered version. I am perpared to \
push out my own free download if noone in this community wants the job. That will end \
the current problem quite nicely.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" \
class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Jul 9, 2020, 10:27 AM Jack &lt;<a \
href="mailto:ostroffjh@users.sourceforge.net">ostroffjh@users.sourceforge.net</a>&gt; \
wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 7/9/20 9:48 AM, Christoph \
Cullmann wrote:<br> &gt; On 2020-07-09 14:18, Jonathan Riddell wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt; On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 12:29, Christoph Cullmann<br>
&gt;&gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:christoph@cullmann.io" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">christoph@cullmann.io</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; You might be able to do that, but as soon as you start to try to<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; keep<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; people<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; from using the names, the cost-free, bureaucracy-free and layer free<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; zone ends.<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; Sending an e-mail to the Microsoft store doesn&#39;t need to cost<br>
&gt;&gt; anything, and it would have more effect if there can be a claim of<br>
&gt;&gt; trademark.   Claiming copyright infringement as discussed on this<br>
&gt;&gt; thread is also sensible but it does need more work and will need at<br>
&gt;&gt; least the cost of buying kdiff3 from their store.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Hi,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; sending just a mail will for sure not be enough, as the license allows<br>
&gt; anybody to upload our stuff there.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; You can start to claim that the name is trademarked but then this will<br>
&gt; only work if the other party doesn&#39;t claim it is not or that we don&#39;t \
<br> &gt; have<br>
&gt; a policy that forbids to upload something with that name + get money <br>
&gt; for it.<br>
I think the suggestion of a letter to Microsoft was about the potential <br>
copyright violation, not about trademark.   They could confirm whether or <br>
not there is an offer of source code within the package without having <br>
to buy it.<br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic