1. Trademarks (was: include statement bugs)
Igor Kachan wrote:
> Patrick Barnes wrote:
<snip>
>> A NAME is not intellectual property. It never is, if you had any idea
>> about legal mumbo jumbo.
>> A NAME can be a trademark. However, you cannot trademark generic
>> terms. Noone can trademark the name "math.e", because it is a generic
>> term.
What about chairs, tables and windows? Those are generic terms, aren't
they? AFAIK some people at Redmond think, that they can copyright (or
trademark or whatever the proper expression is) windows.
This is a very tricky field, those people at Redmond probably will not
engage 1 lawyer, but 4 or more when they want to solve any problem in
this regard. Also, there are different laws in different countries.
<snip>
Regards,
Juergen
2. Re: Trademarks (was: include statement bugs)
Hi, Juergen!
----------
> Igor Kachan wrote:
>
>> Patrick Barnes wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> A NAME is not intellectual property. It never is, if you had any idea
>>> about legal mumbo jumbo.
>>> A NAME can be a trademark. However, you cannot trademark generic
>>> terms. Noone can trademark the name "math.e", because it is a generic
>>> term.
>
> What about chairs, tables and windows? Those are generic terms, aren't
> they? AFAIK some people at Redmond think, that they can copyright (or
> trademark or whatever the proper expression is) windows.
> This is a very tricky field, those people at Redmond probably will not
> engage 1 lawyer, but 4 or more when they want to solve any problem in
> this regard. Also, there are different laws in different countries.
>
> <snip>
>
> Regards,
> Juergen
Something wrong is in this you post, but some table can have the own name,
say The "RedStar" Table. If you want, you can register it as trademark
under that own name. 'table' is just a word, not a name in this sense.
But a library can not exist without its own filename.
So it is automated process - you create files under their
*own* names just immediatelly.
A name is needed to register something.
How can you register something without the concrete name of this object?
In your office, you have chairs under their numbers.
These numbers are the own names of these chairs, and these
chairs are registered in some grossbook under these numbers.
Remember Irv's The Perfect Solution - 'The Perfect Solution' is
the concrete own name of his suggestion - to give EU authors
the numbers as to, say, chairs in your office - 000...999.
But who wants the 666 number?
I say, there is good sense of humor on this list, no? 
There are well known brand names in the World, say, I have the IBM PC
"NetVista" and IBM flat panel "ThinkVision" - 'brands' of the IBM company.
I think, we can just respect the author's rights on the names of their
files. Any own name may be registered and protected by law too.
Do you want Germany to defence your rights?
Pay money and register your proggy!
And you will be protected by Germany as IBM is protected by US!
"Money, money, money ..." - do you remember that ditty?
Good Luck!
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
3. Re: Trademarks (was: include statement bugs)
Igor Kachan wrote:
> But a library can not exist without its own filename.
> So it is automated process - you create files under their
> *own* names just immediatelly.
We're not talking about the big things. So what if you made a library
that used a small include file that did misc things to text, what would
you call it? text.e? Of course you would call it another thing,
just to support your side in this debate, but this is about what people
normally would do. Who would want to create unique filenames for all their
small 1k-include files?
Enough of this rubbish.
Regards, Alexander Toresson
Shhh! Be vewy quiet! I'm hunting wuntime ewwows!
4. Re: Trademarks (was: include statement bugs)
Hi, Juergen, again!
See, please, below you wrote:
> Igor Kachan wrote:
But there are no my words below Patrick's words at all.
So it is something wrong in your post.
Do you see now?
Do you want me to answer?
----------
> From: Juergen Luethje <j.lue at gmx.de>
> To: EUforum at topica.com
> Subject: Trademarks (was: include statement bugs)
> Sent: 20 oct 2004 y. 15:35
>
>
> Igor Kachan wrote:
>
> > Patrick Barnes wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> A NAME is not intellectual property. It never is, if you had any idea
> >> about legal mumbo jumbo.
> >> A NAME can be a trademark. However, you cannot trademark generic
> >> terms. Noone can trademark the name "math.e", because it is a generic
> >> term.
>
> What about chairs, tables and windows? Those are generic terms, aren't
> they? AFAIK some people at Redmond think, that they can copyright (or
> trademark or whatever the proper expression is) windows.
> This is a very tricky field, those people at Redmond probably will not
> engage 1 lawyer, but 4 or more when they want to solve any problem in
> this regard. Also, there are different laws in different countries.
>
> <snip>
>
> Regards,
> Juergen
-----
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
