Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

On Friday 07 August 2009 20:10:14 you wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Raymond Martin <laseray@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > Not at all. There is even evidence in the FSF documentation somewhere
> > exactly
> > about this point and they vehemently disagree with any attitude like
> > that. We
> > all know very well the situation of Emacs, Xemacs, and various other
> > forks.
>
> The FSF is not the law. I suggest you look up Trademark Law to realize why
> you are wrong, and why you are subject to a lawsuit for knowingly creating
> a product that is infringing on an already existing trademark(Regeristered
> or Unregeristered would make a small, but only small, difference in this
> case), and can easily be confused as such. In fact the case against
> forcing you to change it is rather strong because not only is your product
> nearly identical in name, it is nearly identical in function and can be
> easily confused with the original.

Another fool. Trademarks apply to commercial interests, the program is
non-commercial in nature. Thus it would be very difficult for anything
to be done about this for creating a free program from a free program.

Maybe you should check the fact that there is already another program called
improvisor that exists that is not Impro-Visor, it is a commercial company
that could claim trademark infringement against Impro-Visor.

So if anybody is in a problem it will be Impro-Visor first.

Raymond
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sat Aug 8 16:15:03 2009