similar to: Bug#391935: Xen trademark might be problematic

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Bug#391935: Xen trademark might be problematic"

2008 Jun 28
0
Bug#391935: updated trademark policy
There's an updated trademark policy available here: http://xen.org/about/legal.html It also includes an email address for questions. I won't try to interpret the 8-page document myself. Hope this helps, Diego
2006 Oct 03
2
Xen is affected by the trademark desease
Hi folks XenSource published a trademark policy[1]. I don't think we will be able to follow it if we want to support installation of different versions at the same time. Bastian [1]: http://www.xensource.com/company/legal.html -- There are some things worth dying for. -- Kirk, "Errand of Mercy", stardate 3201.7 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was
2004 Dec 03
1
CentOS-3 errata - updated httpd fixes trademark issue
A new version of httpd is available for CentOS-3 i386 This fixes a missed trademark issue in previous build. https://bugzilla.caosity.org/show_bug.cgi?id=710 refers. Updated files are :- updates/i386/RPMS/httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/httpd-devel-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2.i386.rpm updates/i386/SRPMS/httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2.src.rpm yum update httpd will be
2007 Jan 01
1
Centos trademark issue
I found an old ROM BIOS chip in my drawer with label Centos(r) Copyright 1994 on it. Then I found http://www.centos.com.tw/ on the net. Has anyone checked if you can use the name centos without any fear of litigation? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070101/3918e0cc/attachment-0001.html>
2008 Oct 03
1
Bug#391935: The answer from Citrix & Xen.org
Hi, I simply asked to upstream for a clarification on the use of the Xen trademark, and received two unambiguous answers. From Citrix: Actually, for the community, you can do whatever you like. The FIT test only applies to commercially distributed Xen products - and is about ensuring compatibility between vendors. Do you need more detail than that?
2010 Jul 20
1
Registered / trademark signs
Colleagues, What is the easiest means to embed a: ? (registered) or ? (trademark) sign in text in a graphic. I would like to use mtext and avoid plotmath, if possible. Ideally, the sign should be superscripted but I can easily sacrifice that. Optimally, I need a solution that works in both OS X and Windows (? XP) and with R versions ? 2.11 Thanks in advance. Dennis Dennis Fisher MD P <
2001 Feb 16
6
ssh(R) trademark issues: comments and proposal
I'd like to address several issues raised by people in relation to my notice of the ssh(R) trademark to the OpenSSH group. Also, I would like to make a proposal to the community for resolving this issue (included at the end). First, I'll answer a number of questions and arguments presented in the discussion. > "the SSH Corp trademark registration in the US is for a logo
2004 Dec 18
3
httpd trademark issue -- here it is!
Hey, A "powered by RedHat" gif recently appeared on the bottom of the mirror monitor (mirmon) page: http://www.advanced-app.com.hk/caosity/ This appeared in place of the "powered by CentOS" gif that used to be there. The mirmon page is getting it from the icons directory under the default html directory. An Apache update in November put the new gif there in place of the
2008 Aug 04
1
Possible problems in your Debian packages
=== xen-3: = 2 bug(s) that should be fixed for the next Debian release: - #391935 <http://bugs.debian.org/391935> Xen trademark might be problematic - #490409 <http://bugs.debian.org/490409> CVE-2008-2004: privilege escalation ------------ interesting stuff probably ends here ------------ This is an automated mail. These mails are sent two times per month. For more information
2008 Jul 01
1
Possible problems in your Debian packages
=== xen-3: = 1 bug(s) that should be fixed for the next Debian release: - #391935 <http://bugs.debian.org/391935> Xen trademark might be problematic ------------ interesting stuff probably ends here ------------ This is an automated mail. These mails are sent two times per month. For more information about these mails, refer to http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/DdpoByMail We are sorry
2005 Aug 19
5
Linux Trademarked?
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25529 what's everyone's thoughts on this one? -- My "Foundation" verse: Isa 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD. -- carpe ductum --
2001 Feb 14
1
More on TTSSH and the SSH trademark
I would also like to mention that when I released TTSSH in May 1998, I had no concerns about violating any trademarks because I observed that the name "SSH" was already being used by several different parties for different purposes --- as the name of Ylonen's original SSH package and its derivatives, as the name of the protocol, and as a component of names of other implementations
2006 Jul 11
2
Trademark registration
Hi, sorry if this is considered off-topic, however I suspect that this list is full of people developing their own web apps who would appreciate this kind of information, so: I was wondering whether anybody would be willing to share his/her experience with trademarking a web app''s name(/logo) in the US. What are the alternatives, and what is the best/most affordable way to do it?
2001 Feb 14
10
SSH trademarks and the OpenSSH product name
Friends, Sorry to write this to a developer mailing list. I have already approached some OpenSSH/OpenBSD core members on this, including Markus Friedl, Theo de Raadt, and Niels Provos, but they have chosen not to bring the issue up on the mailing list. I am not aware of any other forum where I would reach the OpenSSH developers, so I will post this here. As you know, I have been using the SSH
2001 Feb 15
0
The SSH trademark issue part #1
Hi, I usually stay away from issues like this, basically because I'm not a lawyer (and don't want to be one), and I don't have a real interest in these issues. Quoting Tatu : > We also have a trademark pending on the Secure Shell mark This seriously undermines the IETF standard draft. It's the same as registering 'milk' as a trademark. Both Secure and Shell are
2001 Feb 14
0
OpenSSH Trademark Infringement
Just thought I'd put my two cents in about the trademark infringement issue. I ran the true SSH for about a month some time back. When I learned of OpenSSH, I dropped the official product and built OpenSSH. Quite frankly, OpenSSH is a superior package. It is cleaner, commercially unencumbered, and with its affiliation to the OpenBSD team, I feel more secure about the code quality. When
2001 Feb 14
0
TTSSH and the SSH trademark
Hi everyone. I want to point out some facts about TTSSH that may be relevant to the claims of trademark infringement by OpenSSH. I'll confine my opinions to another message :-). I released my product, which has always been named "Teraterm SSH" and is usually abbreviated to "TTSSH", to the public in May 1998. TTSSH is a free software Windows client for the SSH1 protocol.
2004 Oct 20
0
CentOS-3 errata - updated squirrelmail removes trademark issue
An updated squirrelmail has been released for CentOS-3 that removes a trademark problem. https://bugzilla.caosity.org/show_bug.cgi?id=682 Updated file is :- squirrelmail-1.4.3-0.e3.1.centos.1.noarch.rpm in updates/i386/RPMS/ These are
2004 Dec 06
0
CentOS-3 x86_64 errata - updated httpd fixes trademark issue
A recent message announced new httpd packages that fixed a trademark issue (refer to https://bugzilla.caosity.org/show_bug.cgi?id=710) These have now been made available for x86_64: RPMS/httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2.x86_64.rpm RPMS/httpd-devel-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2.x86_64.rpm RPMS/mod_ssl-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2.x86_64.rpm SRPMS/httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2.src.rpm Execute "yum update
2009 Feb 03
2
Info related to the use of trademarks in documentation
There was an interesting note in a recent fedoraproject.org newsletter regarding Redhat's legal views on referring to others' trademarks. Since the comments are lengthy, they are not reproduced here and are available at the links below. FWN/Issue161: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue161#Legal Callaway note: