tr@wind.bellcore.com (tom reingold) (09/03/87)
In article <6125@ut-ngp.UUCP> omega@ut-ngp.UUCP (Omega.Mosley`) writes: $ In article <681@neoucom.UUCP>, wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: $ > I just heard on the news that IBM is suing Orchid and AST for $ > mis-using the term PS/2 (apparently tm IBM) in their advertisements. $ > OK, I'll grant them that. IBM aslo filed suit against AST for $ > using the suffix "2" in the name of one of their enhancement boards $ > intended for use with the PS/2. I guess that now that IBM owns the $ > rights to 2, the rest of us will learn to have to make due with the $ > other 9 digits. $ > $ > I wonder what Apple with have to say about the Apple II -- or is $ > that the "Apple Eye Eye" $ $ [...] $ $ ....egads, this is just about as silly as Lotus suing over look & feel. Next $ thing you know, we'll have IBM telling us they own the rights to the words $ "Floppy Disk", "Motherboard", and "8086". $ [...] $ I read about a lawsuit that really made me laugh. Computer Land sued Business Land because of the "Land" in the name. Fortunately, the judge threw the suit out, saying, "What are you going to do next, sue Disneyland??" Tom Reingold INTERNET: tr@bellcore.bellcore.com UUCP: {ihnp4,ucbvax,decvax}!bellcore!tr {ulysses,allegra,clyde,princeton}!bellcore!tr
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (09/04/87)
In article <681@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: >I just heard on the news that IBM is suing Orchid and AST for >mis-using the term PS/2 (apparently tm IBM) in their advertisements. >OK, I'll grant them that. IBM aslo filed suit against AST for >using the suffix "2" in the name of one of their enhancement boards >intended for use with the PS/2. I guess that now that IBM owns the >rights to 2, the rest of us will learn to have to make due with the >other 9 digits. > >Bill (wtm@neoucom.UUCP ...!cbatt!neoucom!wtm) This could pose a problem for me as I have used lots of 2's in many of my programs. Do I have to extract them all and send them to IBM ? What is the work around ? One thing I thought of was redefineing HEX as: 0 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f g and calling it sexadecimal, so I tried it and asked sombody here at work to give to me in sex and they hit me, and a guy across the way looked at me funny. Perhaps IBM would reconsider if everyone takes all their 2's from their programs, and send them by US mail to IBM's legal department, with carbon copies to just about everyone there. -- Richard Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the key in my ignition..."
greg@gryphon.CTS.COM (Greg Laskin) (09/04/87)
In article <1424@gryphon.CTS.COM> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: >In article <681@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: >>I just heard on the news that IBM is suing Orchid and AST for >>mis-using the term PS/2 (apparently tm IBM) in their advertisements. >>OK, I'll grant them that. IBM aslo filed suit against AST for >>using the suffix "2" in the name of one of their enhancement boards >>intended for use with the PS/2. I guess that now that IBM owns the >>rights to 2, the rest of us will learn to have to make due with the >>other 9 digits. >> >>Bill (wtm@neoucom.UUCP ...!cbatt!neoucom!wtm) > >This could pose a problem for me as I have used lots of 2's in many >of my programs. Do I have to extract them all and send them to IBM ? > >What is the work around ? > >One thing I thought of was redefineing HEX as: > >0 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f g > >and calling it sexadecimal, so I tried it and asked sombody here >at work to give to me in sex and they hit me, and a guy >across the way looked at me funny. > This would more than likely be an infringement on CBS Personal Softwares new copy protection method. Their method depends on "gaps" in the binary image of a program that contain no twos. This would trigger a government mandated copy protection device that would prevent the recording drive from writing. In the IBM suit, the trademark issue is actually over the "/2". IBM claims this as a trademark. Zilog claims the single letter "Z" as a trademark, though. -- Greg Laskin "When everybody's talking and nobody's listening, how can we decide?" INTERNET: greg@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4}!crash!gryphon!greg UUCP: {philabs, scgvaxd}!cadovax!gryphon!greg
dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) (09/04/87)
In article <2342@bellcore.bellcore.com> tr@wind.UUCP (tom reingold) writes: >I read about a lawsuit that really made me laugh. Computer Land sued >Business Land because of the "Land" in the name. Fortunately, the >judge threw the suit out, saying, "What are you going to do next, sue >Disneyland??" Actually it's a bit ironical, because Computerland had a predecessor called Computer Shack, and it had to change its name because Radio Shack sued it successfully. Both land and shack are pretty generic terms, as are words such as "computer", "micro", "soft", "pc", and "sig". Yet combine them two at a time, and you get a trademark that judges will frequently uphold as valid. -- Rahul Dhesi UUCP: {ihnp4,seismo}!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi
sam@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Sam Baxter) (09/04/87)
in article <1098@bsu-cs.UUCP>, dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) says: >In article <2342@bellcore.bellcore.com> tr@wind.UUCP (tom reingold) writes: >> Computer Land sued >>Business Land because of the "Land" in the name. > > Actually it's a bit ironical, because Computerland had a predecessor > called Computer Shack, and it had to change its name because Radio > Shack sued it successfully. If my memory serves me correctly, Computer Shack not only copied the "Shack" but they also copied the *style* of the Radio Shack logo. I believe that strongly reinforced Tandy's case (and was cause for the final decision). I'm not a lawyer (just a humble programmer :-), but it's my understanding that registered trademarks are not simply on words, but on the way which words are printed. Yes? No? I must agree that claiming that "/2" cannot be used by anybody in the computer industry but IBM is ludicrous at best. (Quick! Somebody find another giant company that once-upon-a-time named a product *Something*/2! Then have THEM sue IBM!) Another thought. I wonder about \2 ... -- Sam Baxter (sam@rd.BRS.Com) BRS Information Technologies; Latham, NY 12110; 518-783-1161 { uunet!steinmetz | ihnp4! { dartvax | philabs!nyfca1 } } !brspyr1!sam "Information is Power" -- R. Waters
billw@ncoast.UUCP (Bill Wisner) (09/06/87)
omega@ut-ngp.UUCP (Omega.Mosley`) in <6125@ut-ngp.UUCP>: >> Next thing you know, we'll have IBM telling us they own the rights to the >> words "Floppy Disk", "Motherboard", and "8086". IBM employees can't call it a "motherboard." Seems that the management thinks that term may be offensive to some customers. That's the same reason they gave us "fixed disks." -- Bill Wisner ..sun!daslink![DCUNSN]MAX::WABE ..{cbosgd,decvax}!hal!ncoast!billw -- "An it harms none, do what thou will." Everything in this message could be wrong. -- "File your lawsuit now and receive this fabulous free gift!" -- 2 is a trademark of International Business Machines. Mouse is a trademark of Apple Computer. Land is a trademark of ComputerLandnd
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (09/07/87)
In article <1760@brspyr1.BRS.Com> sam@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Sam Baxter) writes: > >I must agree that claiming that "/2" cannot be used by anybody >in the computer industry but IBM is ludicrous at best. (Quick! >Somebody find another giant company that once-upon-a-time named >a product *Something*/2! Then have THEM sue IBM!) > >Another thought. I wonder about \2 ... > >-- Ok. Cado Computer Systems (cadovax) used to have a product called the /1. There was a 20/1 and a 40/1. Then came the /2, then the /4, and I came in somewhere around the /8. Cado got bought by Contel, and is now Contel Buisness Systems, but they still have stuff for the Cado model /2 (Do you have a 20 or 40; that number was only the terminal model #, the n in /n referred to the number of users you could run on one of these 8085 based beasties) >Sam Baxter (sam@rd.BRS.Com) >BRS Information Technologies; Latham, NY 12110; 518-783-1161 >{ uunet!steinmetz | ihnp4! { dartvax | philabs!nyfca1 } } !brspyr1!sam >"Information is Power" -- R. Waters -- Richard Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the key in my ignition..."
omega@ut-ngp.UUCP (09/08/87)
....do you know when that Cado designation was released? ....remember, IBM has had System/1 for years...[[regretfully]] Omega.Mosley
john@frog.UUCP (John Woods, Software) (09/08/87)
In article <1760@brspyr1.BRS.Com>, sam@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Sam Baxter) writes: > > I must agree that claiming that "/2" cannot be used by anybody > in the computer industry but IBM is ludicrous at best. (Quick! > Somebody find another giant company that once-upon-a-time named > a product *Something*/2! Then have THEM sue IBM!) > How about using >>1 instead :-) ? When IBM trademarked PL/1, the also trademarked PL/2, PL/3, PL/4, ... through I don't know how many. -- John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA, (617) 626-1101 ...!decvax!frog!john, ...!mit-eddie!jfw, jfw@eddie.mit.edu Maybe it's the sound of a WET RAG hitting a smooth WEASEL!
rs1@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Sersted) (09/09/87)
In article <1760@brspyr1.BRS.Com>, sam@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Sam Baxter) writes: > in article <1098@bsu-cs.UUCP>, dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) says: > >In article <2342@bellcore.bellcore.com> tr@wind.UUCP (tom reingold) writes: > >> Computer Land sued > >>Business Land because of the "Land" in the name. > > Lots of stuff deleted. > Somebody find another giant company that once-upon-a-time named > a product *Something*/2! Then have THEM sue IBM!) > > Another thought. I wonder about \2 ... ^^^^^^^^^ That won't work. the "\" kills the special meaning of the "2". Then IBM will only have part of a trademark. However, "PS\\2", will work just fine because the first "\" kills the special meaning of the second "\". > > -- > Sam Baxter (sam@rd.BRS.Com) > BRS Information Technologies; Latham, NY 12110; 518-783-1161 > { uunet!steinmetz | ihnp4! { dartvax | philabs!nyfca1 } } !brspyr1!sam > "Information is Power" -- R. Waters ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ But, silliness is fun. -- Me Roger Sersted (Bell Labs, Naperville, IL) ihnp4!ihlpa!rs1 &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& --------B------E-------- $$$$$$$$$I$$$$R$$$$$$$$$ **********Z**R********** |||||||||||A||||||||||||
merchant@dartvax.UUCP (Peter Merchant) (09/09/87)
In article <681@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: >I just heard on the news that IBM is suing Orchid and AST for >mis-using the term PS/2 (apparently tm IBM) in their advertisements. >OK, I'll grant them that. IBM aslo filed suit against AST for >using the suffix "2" in the name of one of their enhancement boards >intended for use with the PS/2. I guess that now that IBM owns the >rights to 2, the rest of us will learn to have to make due with the >other 9 digits. > >Bill (wtm@neoucom.UUCP ...!cbatt!neoucom!wtm) I think IBM owns the right to "/2", not the number two. Thus, any program that divides by two is violating their copyright. Better modify all your programs to multiply by .5 instead! :^D :^D :^D -- Peter Merchant (merchant@dartvax.UUCP)
davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) (09/09/87)
In article <1600@frog.UUCP> john@frog.UUCP (John Woods, Software) writes: |In article <1760@brspyr1.BRS.Com>, sam@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Sam Baxter) writes: |> |How about using >>1 instead :-) ? | |When IBM trademarked PL/1, the also trademarked PL/2, PL/3, PL/4, ... through |I don't know how many. I have heard this rumor, but I question its validity for several reasons. (1) PL/1 is an ANSI standard, and therefore can't be trademarked to anybody, (2) IBM has not "defended" the PL/1 symbol as a trademark, one of the requirements, and it is one three manuals just in my office. (3) To get a trademark the symbol must be used in interstate trade, something I doubt that IBM has done. Unless there is some hard information proving this, such as filing dates, indication on manuals that the symbol is a trademark, or information on suits filed to defend PL/n, I assume that this is just a repetition of an old rumor. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
dyer@atari.UUCP (Landon Dyer) (09/10/87)
in article <1600@frog.UUCP>, john@frog.UUCP (John Woods, Software) says: > > When IBM trademarked PL/1, the also trademarked PL/2, PL/3, PL/4, ... through > I don't know how many. > Some genius lawyer in the "old" Atari wanted to copyright all possible eight-by-eight monochrome bitmaps. The apocryphal part to this tale is that he moved to Tibet, where he still works in a cave high in the Himalayas. When he finishes all the drawings, the universe will end.... -- -Landon Dyer, Atari Corporation {sun,amdcad,lll-lcc,imagen}!atari!dyer The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Atari or the AI software that has taken over my brain. Yow! I am waiting for my warranty-expired interrupt! FREE P1!
bobmon@iucs.UUCP (RAMontante [condition that I not be identified]) (09/10/87)
>| >|When IBM trademarked PL/1, the also trademarked PL/2, PL/3, PL/4, ... through >|I don't know how many. > >I have heard this rumor, but I question its validity for several >reasons. (1) PL/1 is an ANSI standard, and therefore can't be >trademarked to anybody, (2) IBM has not "defended" the PL/1 symbol as a >trademark, one of the requirements, and it is one three manuals just in >my office. (3) To get a trademark the symbol must be used in interstate >trade, something I doubt that IBM has done. My manuals all refer to PL/I, that's a capital "I" rather than a "one". I was told that this was because the "I"-form is trademark/copyright-able. "PL/1" has some prior usage as the title of a book (by an IBM employee, I think).
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (09/10/87)
In article <6183@ut-ngp.UUCP> omega@ut-ngp.UUCP (Omega.Mosley`) writes: > >....do you know when that Cado designation was released? 77-78 timeframe > >....remember, IBM has had System/1 for years...[[regretfully]] They can have /1 :-) > Omega.Mosley -- Richard J. Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the key in my ignition..."
rlw@philabs.Philips.Com (Richard Wexelblat) (09/10/87)
In article <1600@frog.UUCP> john@frog.UUCP (John Woods, Software) writes: >When IBM trademarked PL/1, the also trademarked PL/2, PL/3, PL/4, ... through >I don't know how many. > >John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA, (617) 626-1101 Wrongo, Bozo. First of all, it's PL/I, not PL/1. Secondly, IBM explicitly disclaimed any rights to the name PL/I at some point during the PL/I standardization activity. I personally checked this information with the following people: Editor, ACM SIGPLAN Notices Editor, "History of Programming Languages" A former Vice Chairman of X3J1, the ANSI PL/I standardization Cte. A member of the SHARE PL/I Project (1965-1972) and they all agreed. (Never known so many technical people to agree so unanimously of a point of argument!) -- --Dick Wexelblat {uunet|ihnp4|decvax}!philabs!rlw rlw@philabs.philips.com
len@array.UUCP (Leonard Vanek) (09/11/87)
In article <1600@frog.UUCP> john@frog.UUCP (John Woods, Software) writes: > >When IBM trademarked PL/1, the also trademarked PL/2, PL/3, PL/4, ... through >I don't know how many. I heard that they went up to PL/99 or PL/100, but foolishly neglected to trademark PL/360. Niklaus Wirth then proceeded to use the name PL/360 for his Algol-like assembly language for the IBM System/360. By the way, in response to an earlier posting on this subject, It is Series/1 not System/1 that IBM has had for many years. I spent 5 years programming on that most unusual machine. Len
allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery) (09/12/87)
As quoted from <5394@ihlpa.ATT.COM> by rs1@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Sersted): +--------------- | > Another thought. I wonder about \2 ... | ^^^^^^^^^ | That won't work. the "\" kills the special meaning of the "2". Then IBM | will only have part of a trademark. However, "PS\\2", will work just fine | because the first "\" kills the special meaning of the second "\". +--------------- I wonder what this does to IBM's trademark, "APL\360"? ;-) -- Brandon S. Allbery, moderator of comp.sources.misc {{harvard,mit-eddie}!necntc,well!hoptoad,sun!mandrill!hal}!ncoast!allbery ARPA: necntc!ncoast!allbery@harvard.harvard.edu Fido: 157/502 MCI: BALLBERY <<ncoast Public Access UNIX: +1 216 781 6201 24hrs. 300/1200/2400 baud>> All opinions in this message are random characters produced when my cat jumped (-: up onto the keyboard of my PC. :-)