dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1) (09/11/90)
If anyone is really concerned about the legalities of these things,
then there should be no 'comp.unix.xxx' groups. They should all
be 'comp.unix.operating.system.xxx'.
Use of Unix as a noun is an encroachment on AT&T's trademark, to which
they are legally obliged to object in order to retain their trademark.
(Trademarks can only be adjectives. If a trademark becomes a noun, it
becomes the common name for something, rather than a word which distinguishes
a particular variety from the general case.)
Look around in the manuals--at least as far as the lawyers have read, it
will always be written as the Unix operating system.
--
Craig Jackson
dricejb@drilex.dri.mgh.com
{bbn,axiom,redsox,atexnet,ka3ovk}!drilex!{dricej,dricejb}wnp@iiasa.AT (wolf paul) (09/12/90)
In article <15489@drilex.UUCP> dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1) writes: >Use of Unix as a noun is an encroachment on AT&T's trademark, to which >they are legally obliged to object in order to retain their trademark. >(Trademarks can only be adjectives. If a trademark becomes a noun, it >becomes the common name for something, rather than a word which distinguishes >a particular variety from the general case.) > >Look around in the manuals--at least as far as the lawyers have read, it >will always be written as the Unix operating system. Of course one can debate whether "unix" in a newsgroup name is a noun or an adjective; but the real issue is that trademark protection does not refer to private conversation, and as long as USENET is "an anarchy", it is just a bunch of private individuals discussing subjects they are interested in, and using any vocabulary they wish in doing so. I cannot see a judge issuing a restraining order against the term "jello" used in private conversation (even in a public place) to refer to any and all gelatine desserts, whether of brand "Jell-O" or not; likewise I cannot see anyone taking serious legal action against the use of the term UNIX in any way in the context of USENET. Mark Williams Co., and Prentice Hall cannot refer to their respective Operating System products as "UNIX v7", but no-one can stop anyone of us taking part in private discussion (even in a public forum like the NET) from referring to Coherent or MINIX as "basically Unix V7 for the PC." Unlike Copyright Law, which also refers to private copying, Trademark protection only protects the use of a term as a trademark, not as a word in private conversation. -- Wolf N. Paul, IIASA, A - 2361 Laxenburg, Austria, Europe PHONE: +43-2236-71521-465 FAX: +43-2236-71313 UUCP: uunet!iiasa.at!wnp INTERNET: wnp%iiasa.at@uunet.uu.net BITNET: tuvie!iiasa!wnp@awiuni01.BITNET * * * * Kurt Waldheim for President (of Mars, of course!) * * * *
tp@mccall.com (09/13/90)
In article <15489@drilex.UUCP>, dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1) writes: > If anyone is really concerned about the legalities of these things, > then there should be no 'comp.unix.xxx' groups. They should all > be 'comp.unix.operating.system.xxx'. Of course, it should have always been comp.os.unix.xxx, since usenet is NOT a unix oriented network, or so I was told while being flamed over creating VMSnet. :-) -- Terry Poot <tp@mccall.com> The McCall Pattern Company (uucp: ...!rutgers!ksuvax1!mccall!tp) 615 McCall Road (800)255-2762, in KS (913)776-4041 Manhattan, KS 66502, USA
dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) (09/13/90)
In <15489@drilex.UUCP> dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1) writes:
Use of Unix as a noun is an encroachment on AT&T's trademark...
If a trademark becomes a noun...
Too late...My observation is that UNIX has been a noun for about ten
years now. Its adjective status probably exists only in the minds of
AT&T's lawyers.
--
Rahul Dhesi <dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com>
UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesikarish@mindcrf.UUCP (Chuck Karish) (09/13/90)
In article <15489@drilex.UUCP> dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1) writes: >If anyone is really concerned about the legalities of these things, >then there should be no 'comp.unix.xxx' groups. They should all >be 'comp.unix.operating.system.xxx'. 'comp.unix-operating-system.xxx', if you please. We don't need a three-level directory hierarchy to satisfy AT&T's lawyers. Of course, the trademark owners have, in their infinite wisdom, limited directory names in their versions of the UNIX operating system to 14 letters, so 'comp.unix.xxx' is more appropriate. -- Chuck Karish karish@mindcraft.com Mindcraft, Inc. (415) 323-9000
gdtltr@freezer.it.udel.edu (Gary Duzan) (09/13/90)
In article <9009122244.AA06635@mindcrf.mindcraft.com> karish@mindcrf.UUCP (Chuck Karish) writes: =>In article <15489@drilex.UUCP> dricejb@drilex.UUCP =>(Craig Jackson drilex1) writes: =>>If anyone is really concerned about the legalities of these things, =>>then there should be no 'comp.unix.xxx' groups. They should all =>>be 'comp.unix.operating.system.xxx'. => =>'comp.unix-operating-system.xxx', if you please. We don't need =>a three-level directory hierarchy to satisfy AT&T's lawyers. =>Of course, the trademark owners have, in their infinite wisdom, =>limited directory names in their versions of the UNIX operating system =>to 14 letters, so 'comp.unix.xxx' is more appropriate. comp.unix-os.* would do. However, is there really anything to worry about? Can AT&T sue USENET? Maybe comp.unix-tm.* would do. :-) Just have a monthly posting with: Subject: Unix is a Registered Trademark of AT&T Bell Labs or whatever, if you really want to. Gary Duzan Time Lord Third Regeneration -- gdtltr@freezer.it.udel.edu _o_ -------------------------- _o_ [|o o|] If you can square, round, or cube a number, why not sphere it? [|o o|] |_O_| "Don't listen to me; I never do." -- Doctor Who |_O_|