[plug] Something is awfully wrong with this scenario. Jeremy?

[simon]

Mr Shayne (shayne at guild.murdoch.edu.au) wrote:
>
>
> Scuse the language but .... wtf?
>
> Jeremy? Is this true?
>

This whole situation leaves me cold..... why?

1) Linus is unaware of this, or at least they do not know if he is aware of
it.

2) Jeremy is doing this on behalf of Linux Australia on behalf of Linus. Seems
odd, if Linus was worried wouldnt he just apply himself or at least take a
more direct route?

3) The action is supposedly meant to avoid abuse of the Linux trademark - but
going by the summaries, the action will simply allow Linux Australia to charge
for the abuse of the Linux trademark :) Perhaps someone can clarify this, but
Im not sure why fees were even mentioned - couldnt it just have been an
allow/deny thing?

4) Can someone point out abuses of the Linux trademark beyond the example
given in the article? (which was really more of an abuse of the 'Linux
Australia' trademark).

5) Who would decide what is an abuse? Are the rules for abuse clearly stated?
Are they stated in any legal manner (ie, can a company use the word Linux in a
trademark capacity and be assured they would not be subject to action)?
Rebranding costs time and money.


There are 2 main groups of people I dont trust (or at least, treat with
extreme scepticism) after having dealt with both groups, and unfortunately
Jeremy appears to fall into both groups :) If the intent is truely what is
stated, perhaps Linus should be made aware, and perhaps he should consider
alternative arrangements which might avoid some of the knee-jerk reactions.

--
=================
Simon Scott
simon at plumtek.com
mob: 0409113359
=================