Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems
On Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 05:35:09PM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> On 7/2/05, Andrew Suffield <email@example.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 09:43:04PM +0100, Gervase Markham wrote:
> > > These are two very different cases, though. If a local admin installs a
> > > new root cert, that's cool - they are taking responsibility for the
> > > security of those users, and they have extreme BOFH power over them
> > > anyway. However, having the root appear by default, so that no-one at
> > > the remote site really knows it's there (who consults the root list) and
> > > it's now on Y thousand or million desktops - that is a different kettle
> > > of fish.
> > You've missed the really interesting, really important case.
> > What about the site admin team for X thousand desktops who produce a
> > modified firefox package to be used across the whole company? This is
> > the normal, expected usage of Debian.
> Happily, trademark law is perfectly indifferent to this case; when the
> modified package is not advertised, marketed, sold, or otherwise used
> in commerce under the trademark, there is no case for trademark
> infringement (AIUI, IANAL).
It's not because Debian doesn't advertise, market, sell, or otherwise
use in commerce its own modified package that other people don't do
that. Think of people selling CD images, preinstalled computers...
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond