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

Sat Mar 10 22:35:04 CST 2012

On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Steve Totaro <
stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Tilghman Lesher <tilghman at meg.abyt.es>wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> > On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Tilghman Lesher 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.
>> >>
>> >> 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.
>>
>> Zaptel Corporation apparently started using the mark in 1999 or
>> before, the date of the registration of the mark.  Digium (previously
>> Linux Support Services) released the first version of Zaptel, version
>> 0.1.0, in 2001.
>>
>> >>  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.
>>
>> I was working for Digium at the time.  There was no three year
>> moratorium, just that Digium was busy on other things, and Zaptel
>> Corporation had been really patient with Digium about the infringement
>> of their mark, but finally demanded that Digium do something about the
>> infringement.
>>
>
> Probably because they had no leg to stand on, and Digium backed down which
> is usually the case.
>
> Again, it was a win-win for Digium, they could get a trademark on their
> own name, cut out Jim Dixon and avoid the annoyance of this calling card
> company who would have probably backed down.
>
> Did they sue or just make allegations?
>
> You keep dodging the relevance of the usage of Asterisk being banned by
> Google Adwords at the same time that DAHDI was going on.  I don't think
> there was ever response to Trixter's Open Letter to Digium, I will have to
> check.
>
> I think it was just kind of left out there to be forgotten.  Whoops, we
> hold the trademark so we hold the power.
>
>
>>
>> >  So in 2005 the decision was made to change from Zaptel to something
>> that
>> > Digium could put a trademark on.
>>
>> The decision was that since we were getting bitten by a trademark
>> issue on the name, we would find a name that we could put a trademark
>> on, such that we would not have to go through that rename a second
>> time.  There were lots of proposals internally, and the particular
>> name (and spelling) of DAHDI was based upon a trademark search to
>> ensure that we weren't infringing on anything else.
>>
>>
> Doubtful, until I see a court date, there is no issue.  The best they
> could do in court is force a name change......  No damages, I doubt they
> would even bother since the companies do completely different things.  Jim
> still has his project name.
>
>
>> >> 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.
>>
>> Irrelevant, because Digium never made the Tormenta ISA card.
>>
>>
> They made the drivers.
>
>
>> > 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.
>>
>> Zaptel version 0.1.0, released in late 2001, was the earliest version
>> I could find.
>>
>>
> See, it is difficult.
>
>
>> >> >> >> 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 snipped a link that was utterly irrelevant to the discussion.  You
>> went off on a tangent insisting that I had said Xorcom created a radio
>> interface, and I did not.  I reincluded the relevant paragraph from a
>> previous email, to remind you exactly what I said.
>>
>>
> My mistake, I mistook what you wrote with "competitors", there are no
> competitors as far as I know.
>
>
>>  >> 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.
>>
>> Where exactly did I say that they didn't break anything?  I agreed
>> that the radio interface was broken, and the Zapata Telephony team
>> made a strategic decision not to update their driver to work with the
>> new release.
>>
>
> Again, I may have made a mistake, in this thread, Sean Bright said it.  I
> think in the other thread you "may" have said it, I will have to re-read.
>
>
>>
>> > It is OK to be wrong, I have been involved in this much longer then you.
>> >  Ignorance to these things is to be expected.
>>
>> I've been involved in this project since at least mid-2002, and there
>> is publically archived evidence to that fact:
>> http://web.archive.org/web/20020723050749/http://asterisk.drunkcoder.com/
>> .
>>  Unfortunately, the older list archives have long since been lost.
>> When did you get involved?
>>
>>
> Sometime in 2002, so I stand corrected.
>
>
>>  -Tilghman
>>
>
> Thanks,
> Steve Totaro
>

Just for reference and info for anyone not familiar with Digium's Adwords
Debacle.

Trixter, AKA Bret, wrote a very good letter and a good thread on the topic
evolved, I am re-reading since I didn't follow the entire thread.

http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/2008-June/026875.html

What was the date of the release of DAHDI?

Thanks,
Steve Totaro
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20120310/f5040f14/attachment-0001.htm>