Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!internet!Jeff Dean From: Jeff Dean Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: UNIX trademark Message-ID: <6012@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Wed, 21-Nov-84 18:33:36 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.6012 Posted: Wed Nov 21 18:33:36 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 23-Nov-84 07:47:19 EST Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 21 What they *can* do under the law is prevent you from using "Unix" as a trademark for some other product that the average person might confuse with the Unix operating system. And they can also require you to do anything they want if you sign an agreement to that effect (like a software license). But the reporter for the Hobokin Herald doesn't have to waste half a column inch on "Unix is a trademark ..." I think you've missed something here. For AT&T to maintain the Unix trademark, it is also necessary for them to ensure that the name does not fall into "common usage" (I'm unsure of the correct legal terminology). If a trademark falls into common usage, then the trademark owner can no longer claim a right to the exclusive use of the trademark. (There are a number of example of product names that are no longer valid trademarks; the best known of these is probably "aspirin.") AT&T has done an extremely good job of making sure that people know that UNIX is a trademark. It can certainly be argued that they have been overly cautious, but, from their point of view, that's probably desirable.