NB moving this to debian-legal with hope for better closure before making more noise on -project
On Mon, 12 Jan 2015, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > I don't think so: > http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:q33o33.2.1 > "The mark consists of a spiral formed with the style of a paintbrush > stroke with the word "debian" written." > And there are much simpler trademarks out there. The logo of a famous > clothing company consists in a blue square with three characters written > in white, in a given font. > i.e. swirl on its own is not trademarked, thus could be freely used > for > other projects > The swirl is a trademark, regardless of your uninformed opinion on that > topic. just for my own education -- could you please support your statement with references? in my case I have cited the official USPTO description of the Debian trademark. As in your example black square without three letters wouldn't be considered a trademark of that closing company -- why then Debian swirl (released under the most open license and not explicitly trademarked) is officially (not just hypothetically) an existing trademark? I do not remember the case when we (Debian/SPI) followed up on cases where nearly exactly the same swirl was used, making "swirl is a trademark" even weaker (without exercise, there is no strength ;) ). Or there were? Cheers, -- Yaroslav O. Halchenko, Ph.D. http://neuro.debian.net http://www.pymvpa.org http://www.fail2ban.org Research Scientist, Psychological and Brain Sciences Dept. Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755 Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419 WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
