[LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

[Ralf Mardorf]

Raymond Martin wrote:
> On Friday 07 August 2009 20:53:05 Thomas Vecchione wrote:
>   
>> Once again forgot to hit Reply-All.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Ralf Mardorf 
>>     
> <ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net>wrote:
>   
>>> I'm not interested to take sides, I only want to learn about the GPL.
>>>
>>> Assumed that Miss B. forks a GPL'd project, as far as I understand the
>>> GPL, Miss R. is allowed to fork a project with a similar name, similar
>>> function, based on the open source code of Miss B. and if Miss B. had no
>>> time to open the source code, because she was in the manicure salon, but
>>> Miss B. accepted the GPL, e.g. a mailing list for manicure software can
>>> witness this, than Miss R. is allowed to decompile the software of Miss
>>> B.. Am I wrong?
>>>       
>> You are confusing Copyright and Trademark Law.  Copyright law says that yes
>> they can fork the project.
>>
>> Trademark Law however says that Miss B. is allowed to follow up legally to
>> prevent a trademark, which can be registered or unregistered, from being
>> confused by another similar trademark that might be confused with it.  The
>> fact that the trademark is similar, and the product is similar, is doubly
>> damning in that case.
>>     
>
> Then you should talk to Bob Keller for violating the trademark of that real
> company that has a possible trademark infringement case against him
> first.

That's right, I mentioned it before, that there is this company, but 
they don't have an interest in or don't know about Bob's "trademark". 
Anyway, there is that Firefox vs Icedove fact. The names and logos also 
can become a problem for FLOSS. Even if Bob is violating a trademark, 
you do it too. But the discussion becomes useless. If anybody isn't fine 
with the other, and now I'm talking about Bob and you, than Bob or you 
should file a lawsuit. Even if everybody from this list would only back 
Bob or just back you, this would not be capable.