[asterisk-biz] PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of a KeySystem (3Com Asterisk IP Telephony Appliance)

[Jay R. Ashworth]

On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 06:01:33PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > They can't protect IAX and DUNDi that way, I'm pretty sure; the
> > *protocols* would be stock, and therefore not violate the license --
> > but since usage of those particular terms is almost certainly
> > nominative anyway, they *still* couldn't enforce.
> 
> trademark wouldnt cover the protocol, only the name, so yes they can in
> the way they they are claiming trademark the name.

Sure they can claim a trademark on the name.

That does not *forbid me from using it to refer to that protocol*, even
in the practice of commerce.

> > > Dont advertise it as asterisk or asterisk based per section "Uses that
> > > are Not Approved by this Policy" paragraph 3 in certain places of your
> > > web page (possibly not anywhere since that would influence search engine
> > > results if the engine indexes based on content).
> > 
> > "Asterisk-based" is, again, nominative.
> 
> According to their policy that is derived from asterisk, according to
> their policy if its not a "Genuine Digium Product" as defined in their
> terms you cant use their words.  This is just what digium is claiming
> publicly and openly on their webpage what you can and cannot do,
> basically if you innovate asterisk in any meaningful way you must fork
> it, which looses the license exceptions, which means it no longer works.
> 
> Its actually a clever way to release it gpl without having the risk of
> anyone ever competing with you (even if they are releasing gpl too).  

You don't actually speak to my assertion, which is that
"Asterisk-based" does not violate their trademark in any meaningful
way.

> > It's also factually correct.  They can't, I don't think, control that
> > usage either, though IANAL.
> 
> well whether or not they can, their use policy states this, and that is
> all I was saying, this isnt really the proper forum to debate whether or
> not they *can*, I was just commenting on the fact that they are claiming
> you cant.
> 
> Personally I think it would be difficult to sue (although trivial to
> file and cost you a bunch of money).  I also dont imagine they would
> sue, but they say they can.  What would be nice is if they came up with
> a policy that was compliant with the *spirit* of the gpl not just its
> wording if they really want to foster good feelings in the community.

Won't argue.  I forget, does GPL v3 speak to trademarks?  I don't even
remember whether v2 does, at the moment.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                   Baylink                      jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com                     '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://photo.imageinc.us             +1 727 647 1274

	     Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
	     Those who count the vote decide everything.
	       -- (Joseph Stalin)