Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#2None of these settings are relevant to 12.04, are they?
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#3While I sympathize with your situation my understanding of trademark law is that it's a sort of "use it or lose it" proposition. If they can't demonstrate that they're making an effort to police their trademark then it can become generic and they lose all exclusive rights to it. I think the best solution here would be for you to choose another domain name.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm...
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#4None of these settings are relevant to 12.04, are they?
Is 12.04 pre-Unity and Amazon ads? These start when the ads started.
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#5While I sympathize with your situation my understanding of trademark law is that it's a sort of "use it or lose it" proposition. If they can't demonstrate that they're making an effort to police their trademark then it can become generic and they lose all exclusive rights to it. I think the best solution here would be for you to choose another domain name. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm.…
It is commentary though, not imitation. You are allowed to comment on things by name. If Shell, for instance sued shelloutsounds.org for the domain, I do not think they would have much of a case and the same applies here. If fixubuntu is using the word 'ubuntu' to mean the company Ubuntu, then the other word is obviously 'fix' and you would be hard pressed to argue that it isn't simply a critical statement rather than an infringing brand.
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#6None of these settings are relevant to 12.04, are they?
That is correct.
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#7While I sympathize with your situation my understanding of trademark law is that it's a sort of "use it or lose it" proposition. If they can't demonstrate that they're making an effort to police their trademark then it can become generic and they lose all exclusive rights to it. I think the best solution here would be for you to choose another domain name. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm.…
It is commentary though, not imitation. You are allowed to comment on things by name. If Shell, for instance sued shelloutsounds.org for the domain, I do not think they would have much of a case and the same applies here. If fixubuntu is using the word 'ubuntu' to mean the company Ubuntu, then the other word is obviously 'fix' and you would be hard pressed to argue that it isn't simply a critical statement rather tha…
They say they are happy to have the commentary, but their policy states that you cannot use ubuntu in a domain name or the ubuntu logo without permission. This applies to everyone.
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#8I sympathize with better default privacy settings too, however you must note that they didn't ask you to remove all references to Ubuntu: They only ask you to remove the logo and the domain name. You can understand they need to make it clear in the cinsumer's mind what belongs to the official sphere of Ubuntu and what doesn't. Also, before saying they're using it against privacy, we should check whether they've asked to take down similar domains with no correlation to criticism or privacy, and they answer is probably yes.
As kcorbitt says, the trademark law requires ongoing enforcement or the owner will lose the legitimity. Have you checked whether they'd let you keep talking about Ubuntu? IANAL, but wouldn't it be correct to keep a website named "Fix Ubuntu" in a domain name such as privacywatch.com? This way they keep the integrity of the brand for the consumers and you stay in the ecosystem.
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is commentary though, not imitation. You are allowed to comment on things by name. If Shell, for instance sued shelloutsounds.org for the domain, I do not think they would have much of a case and the same applies here. If fixubuntu is using the word 'ubuntu' to mean the company Ubuntu, then the other word is obviously 'fix' and you would be hard pressed to argue that it isn't simply a critical statement rather tha…
They say they are happy to have the commentary, but their policy states that you cannot use ubuntu in a domain name or the ubuntu logo without permission. This applies to everyone.
Ubuntu may not have the right to dictate usage of their name in a domain - see: paypalsucks.org, microsoftsucks.org, ebaysucks.com, etc.
Re: Ubuntu shouldn't abuse trademark law to silence critics of its privacy decisions
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is commentary though, not imitation. You are allowed to comment on things by name. If Shell, for instance sued shelloutsounds.org for the domain, I do not think they would have much of a case and the same applies here. If fixubuntu is using the word 'ubuntu' to mean the company Ubuntu, then the other word is obviously 'fix' and you would be hard pressed to argue that it isn't simply a critical statement rather tha…
They say they are happy to have the commentary, but their policy states that you cannot use ubuntu in a domain name or the ubuntu logo without permission. This applies to everyone.
This applies to everyone.
Obviously it does not apply to everyone. Desmond Tutu, for instance is the patron of a very different Ubuntu foundation - http://www.saubuntu.co.za/ - and I doubt that Mark will be sending him any takedown notices anytime soon. Ubuntu itself is also an existing word that is free to use in its original context. Added to this, even if you are using the word ubuntu to mean the company Ubuntu, then in pretty much anywhere in the world you can use a trademarked word to criticise the thing it trademarks, otherwise critics would have a really hard time writing reviews. Criticism is plainly not imitation and it is imitation that trademark law legislates on.