Re: tlug: Linux as Trade Mark?

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@example.com>]

>>>>> "Kei" == Kei Furuuchi <kfur@example.com> writes:

    Kei> Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
    >> >>>>> "Kei" == Kei Furuuchi <kfur@example.com> writes:
    >> 
    Kei> If there is the proctection already due to Paris Treaty as
    Kei> JLUG poeple claim, Is the applicatioo unnecessary?
    >> Yes and no.  It is much easier to get Japanese courts to
    >> support a claim based on a Japanese trademark than a claim
    >> based on a foreign mark via the Paris treaty.  This is true for
    >> any country, of course.

    Kei> Isn't it sufficient to have the defense mechanism based on
    Kei> the Paris Treaty? If some software company tries to apply the
    Kei> name, Linux community can prevent it based on the treaty as

Yes, but this is difficult and expensive.  I do not know of a specific
application that would hurt, but suppose Linus decided not to allow
arbitrary peole to make "Linux" T-shirts (he would never do that, but
this is the simplest example I can think of why there could be a
problem).

Would Linus go after such a T-shirt maker?  Probably not, it's too
expensive (I think; he would have to prove in court that it was
protected in the other jurisdiction, and he would additionally have to
prove that リナックス was covered by the American trademark; I know
many Americans who pronounce it "Lie-nooks", ie ライヌックス) under
Japanese law without the Japanese trademark.

But then you suffer the risk of losing your trademark.  In the US, the 
trademark rights of "Coke", "Pepsi", and "Kleenex" have all been
drastically restricted in the following sense.  If you go into a
restaurant with an exclusive contract with Coca-Cola, and ask for a
"Pepsi", the restaurant may give you Coke without violating the Pepsi
trademark.  The same is true for asking for Coke and getting Pepsi,
and Kleenex vs. generic tissue.  This was _not_ true for "Xerox" for
example, until the original xerography patent expired.  Until then,
only Xerox machines could make Xerox copies.

    Kei> JLUG people claim that the similar name like "Linax" was not

If whatever company makes Lysol and Inax merge, I would bet 10,000 yen
(even odds) that they can use the word "Lynax" as a trademark for a
self-cleaning toilet, which is run by a microprocessor operated by
(kusai!)  Windows-CE, despite Linus's Japanese trademark.  Without a
Japanese trademark, Linus would lose (I'll give 4:1 odds on that bet).

    Kei> allowed. Overdoing the defense results in the same effect as
    Kei> JLUG people claim Linux industry is holding businesses
    Kei> pending the application?

That's pure fluff.  The companies who claim to be harmed weren't
named, as you point out.  According to the terms current business is
not harmed.

I can see why publishing companies would be upset, they're probably
worried about the on-shelf stock being grandfathered (ie, they can
sell what they've already printed).  They should have pointed out that
this is a problem, and left it at that.

Future development is only harmed in the "bad guys take over PHT"
scenario, and then only if Linus does not have property right in the
trademark.

    Kei> Is JLUG powerful enough to harm PHT business?  I think the
    Kei> inquiry of JLUG is well deserved whatever nationality they
    Kei> are. But, claim of transfer of tm to other party contradicts
    Kei> their own opinion. So I don't understand both parties.

    Kei> This open inquiry of JLUG is a way grave since no one can
    Kei> accidentally post a web page in web.

You've answered your own question.

-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences        Tel/fax: +1 (298) 53-5091
--------------------------------------------------------------
Next Nomikai: 18 September, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
Next Meeting: 10 October, Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate 12:30
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp