"Mark Kent" <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:al3hm5-1ig.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> QuantumLeaper <leaper@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>
>> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:2137171.pg7XnqFlmv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Trademark Insanity
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> | It's bad enough that we have to deal with struggles over the use of
>>> | trademarks that have become generic terms, like "Xerox" and "Coke",
>>> and
>>> | trademarks that were already generic terms among specialists, such
>>> | as "Windows", but a new low in trademarking has been reached by the
>>> joint
>>> | efforts of Dell and the US Patent and Trademark Office. Cyndy
>>> Aleo-Carreira
>>> | reports that Dell has applied for a trademark on the term "cloud
>>> computing".
>>> | The opposition period has already passed and a notice of allowance has
>>> been
>>> | issued. That means that it is very likely that the application will
>>> soon
>>> | receive final approval.
>>> |
>>> | [...]
>>> |
>>> | In other words, this is a pure example of theft from the public
>>> domain.
>>> | Speakers of English have a term, "cloud computing", which the US
>>> government
>>> | is on the verge of privatizing and assigning exclusively to Dell.
>>> Other
>>> | companies providing similar services will not be able to describe what
>>> they
>>> | are doing as "cloud computing" anymore than Nike will be able to
>>> describe its
>>> | shoes as Reeboks.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=434
>>>
>>> It's not just the patent system that's becoming a joke. The politicians
>>> are too
>>> easily corruptible.
>>>
>> Your right Coke-Cola and Xerox should have their product names placed
>> into
>> Public Domain, just because every uses their name for a generic product,
>> right. You going to give those companies their money back, after they
>> have spent millions building their product placements?
>
> Irrelevant straw man... The issue is about the commonly used term
> "cloud computing" and whether it can be assigned to a private company
> *after* it's been in common usage.
>
I didn't bring up the issue of Company NAMES, should be placed into public
usage just because everyone is using that way. That is why companies MUST
defend trademarks but can ignore patent problems if they want too.
>> Also Dell won't get "cloud computing", since the NetcCentric tried in
>> the
>> late 90's to do the same thing.
>
> Again, not really the issue, as just because person a) has failed at
> something doesn't necessarily mean that person b) will also fail.
>
It failed the first time because it was in common usage already.
>> I do agree with you the patent system needs an overhaul but Software
>> patients might be on the way out also.
>>
>
> This is trademark, though, not patent.
>
> The issue here is that cloud computing has been in regular usage for a
> long time, so trying to grab it as a trademark is not right and proper.
> It would only happen in a very corrupt regime, I think.
>
Mark, Roy is the one who brought up the patent issue, all I did was agree
with him.
|
|
