Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:27:59 +0100 From: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> To: "Terry Lambert" <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, "Mike DeGraw-Bertsch" <mbertsch@radioactivedata.org> Cc: "Person, Roderick" <personrp@ccbh.com>, "Fergus Cameron" <cameron@argus-systems.com>, <advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Hotmail _still_ runs FreeBSD! Message-ID: <014001c18845$8a87ef90$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0112182054470.90743-100000@glow> <3C1FFDE5.90B751FE@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry writes: > Their list doesn't list common law trademarks > for .NET and Passport because you have to show > use over time. If Microsoft were using and intended these as trademarks, it would list them, even for a common-law assertion of trademark status. They are not stupid enough to deliberately or even accidentally omit two marks that would be potentially crucial to their future strategy from their trademark list if they really intended to treat them as trademarks. Their failure to list them, along with their conspicuous failure to treat them as such in every other context I've examined, implies that they do not consider them trademarks and do not plan to defend them as such. Especially when contrasted with their treatment of other potential and established trademarks, this alone argues for a loss of any common-law status these two marks might have. > The incomplete registration shows their clear > intent, in any case. If they were established as common-law trademarks, they wouldn't need to show intent. And only one attempt to register a trademark is being made, for .NET as a typed drawing. That application does not show prior or current commercial use of the mark. I could find no application for Passport. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?014001c18845$8a87ef90$0a00000a>