[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Remove chan_usbradio and app_rpt.

[Steve Totaro]

On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Tilghman Lesher <tilghman at meg.abyt.es>wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Steve Totaro wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Steve Totaro wrote:
> >> > http://business.zibb.com/trademark/zaptel/29737279
> >> >
> >> > Filing Date:1999
> >> >
> >> > Zaptel used by Jim Dixon common law trademark with interstate commerce
> >> > was
> >> > at the latest 1999 and probably earlier.  I cannot find the original
> BSD
> >> > driver for the first Tormenta card, but that was the start of the
> Zaptel
> >> > Telephony Project.  If it was before the federal filing date, then
> they
> >> > had
> >> > no grounds for anything laying claim.
> >>
> >> No.  Timeline matters for copyright law.  This is trademark law.  It
> >> is completely different.
> >
> > Um wrong.  Pretty clear
> > cut http://www.dailyblogtips.com/qa-how-does-trademark-law-work/
> >
> > I could post the actual laws, but this is much more simple for the
> layman.
>
> Clearly, you need to re-read it yourself.


Wrong, I understand and looked into the founding of the company and the
entire history.


> The link says it does not
> matter who registers first, only who starts using it first.  You've
> done the research, apparently, to figure out when Zaptel Corporation
> (calling cards) registered their mark, but you haven't done the
> research to say when they first started using the mark.


Read above.


>  Digium has
> paid staff attorneys, and if they made the determination that it was
> not worth pursuing, it's a pretty safe bet that Zaptel Corporation was
> using the mark first.
>
>
Doubtful, There was a three year moratorium on transitioning from the
Zaptel name.  You would probably have noted that if you really knew the
true story.  So in 2005 the decision was made to change from Zaptel to
something that Digium could put a trademark on.


> Additionally, it matters not one whit when the Zapata Telephony
> Project started, only when Digium started using the mark.  The Zapata
> Telephony project is a completely separate organization from Digium,
> and if they plausibly have a trademark on the Zaptel name, that does
> not extend to Digium.  Separate organizations, separate trademarks.
>
>
Again, the driver for the first Tormenta card was called zaptel.

I did the research, the timelines on when Digium started using the Zaptel
name from the Zapata Telephony project are not defined and I cannot find
the code.  I will check the repo and see how far it goes back, to .3 I
think, frame relay.


> >> >> The maintainers of app_rpt have made a strategic decision that
> >> >> they don't want to do the work to make their code compatible with
> >> >> DAHDI.  There's no technical reason why they couldn't -- there's
> >> >> several competing hardware manufacturers who have kept pace and made
> >> >> their work compatible with DAHDI.
> >> >
> >> > Who are these competing vendors????  I know of zero.
> >>
> >> Let's start with Xorcom, whose drivers are distributed with DAHDI.
> >> There are others, some of which work with DAHDI drivers as
> >> distributed, some of which modify DAHDI post-distribution.
> >
> > What is the model or name of the Xorcom Radio Interface?  You are being
> very
> > vague and I cannot find that product offering.
>
>
You snipped a link of mine that makes your look like a silly boy.  It isn't
proper to snip links to change the context of discussion.


> I never said that there were competing radio interfaces, only that
> other companies had kept pace with the changes in DAHDI for their
> hardware.  Xorcom makes a USB-based channel bank, among other
> offerings, and their xpp USB driver interface was distributed with
> Zaptel and is still distributed with DAHDI today.
>
>
And there are several vendor who didn't.  Digium botched up, said DAHDI was
going to be a find and replace function of Zaptel and then sure enough
broke a bunch of stuff that you claim they did not break.  LOL.

It is OK to be wrong, I have been involved in this much longer then you.
 Ignorance to these things is to be expected.


> -Tilghman
>
> --
>

Thanks,
Steve T
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20120310/bdf319cb/attachment.htm>