Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site gould9.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!gould9!joel
From: joel@gould9.UUCP (Joel West)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Unix(tm) is a trademark...
Message-ID: <409@gould9.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Mar-86 11:52:38 EST
Article-I.D.: gould9.409
Posted: Mon Mar 24 11:52:38 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Mar-86 05:27:31 EST
References: <110@atari.UUcp> <147@olamb.UUCP> <3791@pur-ee.UUCP> <546@uel> <895@kitty.UUCP>
Organization: CACI, Inc. -- La Jolla, Calif.
Lines: 37

In article <895@kitty.UUCP>, larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman) writes:
> 	Seriously though, I wonder why AT&T never registered the trademark;
> I would think that if AT&T was really serious about usage enforcement, they
> would have made the effort at registration.

I believe, since AT&T wasn't legally in the computer businness when they 
developed UNIX, they probably didn't want to/couldn't make overt acts towards
acting like they were.

No one doubts that AT&T has many well-paid lawyers.  The general consensus 
is that if AT&T could register the trademark, they would.

> 	"C3. The trademark UNIX may not be used in a hyphenated expression
> as `UNIX-based' or `UNIX-like.'"

I believe AT&T is trying to scare (convince) the UNIX community into
giving their unregistered trademark more protection than it has been
given in the past, in order to avoid having UNIX becoming a generic
(and thus unprotectable) term.  There are two interesting precedents:

	1. "Xerox", as in "xerox this for me, will you?"  The
	   Xerox Corp. ran a "public awareness" campaign about 3 years
	   ago, at the same time "TV Guide" did.  Both were aimed at
	   journalists in particular, because of:

	2. The Monsanto decision.  The word "Formica" was held by the
	   Supreme Court to be a generic term for laminated materials
	   (much like "aspirin") because Monsanto had not taken effort
	   to protect their product.

There's no problem, I believe, in calling something a "trademark of..."
as long as no one else has registered the term.  If two companies
have a similar, un-registered trademark, I don't know what happens.

Did I mention that the MacDonalds Corp. is suing all Macintosh
developers (including Apple) for use of the term 'Mac' as a modifier
in any product name (MacDraw, MacWrite, MacTutor, etc...)