Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tektronix!percival!bucket!leonard
From: leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: docs on PK contempt suit
Message-ID: <1051@bucket.UUCP>
Date: 11 Sep 88 19:58:19 GMT
References: <5482@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <396@pigs.UUCP>
Reply-To: leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson)
Organization: Rick's Home Grown Unix; Portland, OR
Lines: 27

In article <396@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (The Beach Bum) writes:
<i read the entire article, including the examples given from the manual.
<phil is going to lose, and lose big while he's at it.  his trying to slip
<"ARCing" and "UNarcing" by in the manual was DUMBDUMBDUMB.  a similiar
<case would be if i built a machine and named it the "VAXpc".  VAX is a
<trademark of DEC.  [ and if you understand the ramifications of the
<precedent which was cited in the brief, this is whereon the case hinges,
<is "ARCing" "similiar" to "ARC".  anyone with freshman english behind
<them should recognize "ARCing" how this word was created. ]

Well, I'm not a lawyer, but from what I've heard about trademark law, SEA may
have waited too long. You *can* loose a trademark if it "becomes a generic
term" (or something like that). Xerox has come close, cellophane did lose
trademark status that way.

And if the references to the existence of ARC files *before* SEA got into
the business are correct, anybody who can afford the legal fee could 
probably win a trademark infringement suit and invalidate their claim
of trademark status for ARC.

I'd be willing to contribute to a fund that was solely intend to challenge SEA
on this. Not to defend PK, but to get rid ofg ARC as a trademark.
-- 
Leonard Erickson		...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'.
You know... I'd rather be a hacker."