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.
> 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.
> 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 at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
|
|
