381–390 of 827 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aside from secrets there is also sensitive data. If someone accidentally uploads some personal information, they need a way to remove it if, say, they receive a court order ordering them to remove it.
I'm not sure how the court could force you to do something you can't possibly do...
https://www.npmjs.com/package/abril-fatface
abril-fatface will be yours. Oh yes, abril-fatface will be yours.
mkdir abril-fatface
cd abril-fatface
npm init
# work your magic…
npm publishEarlier quoted context omitted.
But TFA's "Kik" seems to be sort of a "project generator" like yeoman or something. There is no overlap between that and even the generously expanded description of the litigious "Kik" that you cite.
So, in your opinion, if I built a software application that let you design and order plate glass in decorative form to be placed in the walls of your house and named this app "Windows" would Microsoft's inevitable attempts at protecting their trademark be overreaching? The windows I named my app for are physical things and Microsoft's are virtual, but I'm releasing a software product called "Windows." Both kik names…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not necessarily true if Kik were planning to open up some kind of API. Also, the way the law works in the US encourages corporations to overreach. If you don't try to protect your trademark from every possible angle, it can lead to your loss of it in a court battle. A lot of times, lawyers will send out letters without caring how the recipient responds -- they only need to have sent the letter at all to have c…
> That's not necessarily true if Kik were planning to open up some kind of API. Surely opening up a new API doesn't give them retroactive rights to the name in that space.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aside from secrets there is also sensitive data. If someone accidentally uploads some personal information, they need a way to remove it if, say, they receive a court order ordering them to remove it.
I'm not sure how the court could force you to do something you can't possibly do...
Engineers often think that they are the first people in history to have thought "Hey, wouldn't it be easy to pull one over on the legal system?" This is, in fact, quite routine. The legal system interprets attempts to route around it as damage and responds to damage with overwhelming force.
> This is not a knee-jerk action Seems like it. Why break everyone's builds? You could just keep the modules there and then declare you will only keep them updated elsewhere?
He doesn't owe you anything. You and other should be thankful for him to have allowed you to use his code. Fuck that entitlement bs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, even this faintly ridiculous fake example of painstaking mental construction would be overreach. No one would ever download your hypothetical architectural software expecting to get an operating system. As a public service, some toilet or compost bin manufacturer ought to start "violating" trademarks by naming toilets etc. after litigious companies. We'd all get a kik out of hearing them argue that database cons…
People with experience in software wouldn't likely confuse the two pieces of software. But most people think "computers" and stop there. Most people visiting an app store would see "Windows" for 99 cents, buy it, then complain when it wasn't Microsoft Windows. They wouldn't read descriptions, and they don't know what an operating system is. Confusion. Microsoft is very likely to prevail in the infringement lawsuit.
This matter has even already been litigated. Microsoft Windows is a valid trademark, Windows is not defensible.
Please see lindows aka linspire.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Granted the license is WTFPL but does that include taking over the IP itself? IANAL but "do whatever the fuck you want to" would seem to include literally everything including taking over the IP.
Yeah I get the "do whatever the fuck you want" but in a legal sense I wasn't sure that could (or did) include actual ownership. I thought that had more to do with copyright and any other IP transferring. Then again I also said I had no idea :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it won't... The caret specifier for 0.0.x packages means "this version and this version exactly ".
Some examples of how it works: ^1.2.3 := >=1.2.3 =0.2.3 =0.0.3
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not necessarily true if Kik were planning to open up some kind of API. Also, the way the law works in the US encourages corporations to overreach. If you don't try to protect your trademark from every possible angle, it can lead to your loss of it in a court battle. A lot of times, lawyers will send out letters without caring how the recipient responds -- they only need to have sent the letter at all to have c…
> That's not necessarily true if Kik were planning to open up some kind of API. Surely opening up a new API doesn't give them retroactive rights to the name in that space.
Technically, Kik (the company) registered their trademark in the class "Computer Software" [0]. That means that no-one else can use the word Kik (and the logo) for this class of activity. The key issue is when the registration happened. Since they've been going since 2009, and Kik (the software project) only started in 2015, Kik the company was there first.
The reason their lawyers are asking for "Kik the project" to change name is because trademarks can become generic if you're not seen to protect your mark [1]. As a private company (particularly VC funded), IP has a lot of financial value: the business will be valuing their trademark. If they don't protect it then they'll be "throwing money away".
The fact that the business world (and VC's generally) highly value IP is why most people over-register. If they didn't go for wide classes, and then in a few years decided to work in a particular area they might not have rights to their "own name" in that class.
It's a case of the Open Source and Business world-views clashing.
[0] Someone else in the thread found the specifics but the link doesn't work for me. [1] Everyone knows the example of Spam.