On 08/09/2009 05:30 AM, Raymond Martin wrote: 
On Saturday 08 August 2009 15:19:09 drew Roberts wrote:
  
On Saturday 08 August 2009 12:34:26 Thomas Vecchione wrote:
    
he standard is "likelihood of confusion." To be more specific, the use of
a trademark in connection with the sale of a good constitutes
infringement if it is likely to cause consumer confusion as to the source
of those goods or as to the sponsorship or approval of such goods.
      
I think Raymond may be keying on the "sale of a good" phrase and indicating
that at least with some Free Software, no good is for *sale*.
    

I thought that was obvious from my comments and the law text itself. No?


If a company had the will or capacity they could drag someone through court for giving away a product that had their trademark on it for giving people a false impression of the original goods. However if there is no money to be earned then it is unlikely. After all didn't those people in the UK gets sued for something similar by McDonalds?

Something along the lines of Trademark infringement and willful damage to reputation. They ended up taking years to clear the case by which time they had been made pretty much bankrupt.

Although IIRC in the end they won and McD's had to pay out instead.

So maybe it's worth the effort.



Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd



Raymond
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev