<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>I love Digium and Mark for what they have done for open source
telephony. I do not like<br>
the direction that Digium is taking. At one point which may not be too
far off, will Digium and the <br>
community part and go each on their own way??<br>
<br>
Today, I vented my frustration on my blog
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://flatplanetphone.com/wordpress/?p=450">http://flatplanetphone.com/wordpress/?p=450</a><br>
If you feel the same, please do likewise<br>
<br>
Moshe<br>
<br>
</tt><br>
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:478FE847.1080800@digium.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Brian West wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">You shouldn't have to contact Digium for such use cases as "Asterisk
Compatible" or "Works with Asterisk".
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
The issue is *not* the use of the trademarks within the ad copy itself
(as you rightly point out), it is the purchase of search
results/listings for those trademarks via the AdWords process. As far as
I'm aware, it's perfectly acceptable to have an ad that says "Our
products are compatible with Asterisk" or "Our products are based on
Asterisk" or similar copy, but purchasing 'Asterisk' or 'Digium' as a
keyword to get those ads to show up in searches is not allowed unless
Digium has authorized you to do so.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>