jay at w1xer.de
Mon Jul 30 11:52:48 CEST 2007
On Jul 30, 2007, at 7:50 AM, Rod Whitby wrote:
>> Ah cripes, who freaking *CARES* about the Graffiti trademark ..
> Hmm ... someone could just as well say:
> "Ah cripes, who freaking *CARES* about the OpenMoko trademark .."
Is someone actually developing something which uses the OpenMoko
properties? I don't think so.
> Doesn't sound so good when you say it that way, does it?
I'm not saying don't be "trademark-sensitive", I'm saying that
worrying about the Graffiti trademark is irrelevant, because nobody
is putting, actually, Graffiti into anything. There are plenty of
Graffiti alternatives around .. it just happens that Graffiti is what
people know "finger painting on your PDA" to be .. its common enough
to warrant usage as a word referring to the activity of finger-
painting symbols for recognition on a devices surface. Graffiti,
itself, is useless to us. Similar techniques which do not violate
anyones rights are useful; to discuss, to implement, and hopefully to
> Note that David didn't accuse anyone of breaching trademark rights, he
> simply pointed out that OpenMoko (or anyone else for that matter other
> than the trademark holder) should be careful not to release any
> package with the trademarked term "Graffiti" in it's name. And he
> he would only say it once, so as not to annoy people by continually
> harping on it.
It would have been wonderful advice if there is actually some release
> Don't forget that OpenMoko is a company too. You can't favour and
> protect one companies trademarks and not do the same for another.
I don't care about the trademark issue until there is actually
something to attach a mark to. So far, there is nothing in this
direction. All I care about is that the technical creativity not be
stifled by legalese so soon in the game ..
More information about the community