On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 8:14 PM, rjf <fate...@gmail.com> wrote: > You can do your own free trademark search, and you can also try to get a > trademark for $159. > There appear to be something like 50 uses of SAGE as a trademark, at least > some of them > for software, software and education, software and engineering.
I know that, since I have investigated this several times before, done searches, etc.. I was careful in my wording when I mentioned money to write "Hiring a law firm to do this *right* can take about $5K." Understanding how to effectively work the trademark system is something probably none of us Sage developers know how to do. The "common law" owners of the Sage trademark in the context we're discussing are the community of Sage developers. But such common law trademark is difficult to enforce. As long as that community is OK with me working with UW to get the trademark officially registered, I can go forward. - William > > > I am not a lawyer. > > > > On Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8:01:01 PM UTC-7, William wrote: >> >> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Dima Pasechnik <dimp...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > On 2012-05-28, Alex Ghitza <aghi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 27 May 2012 at 10:48AM -0700, William Stein wrote: >> >>>> If you think this abuse of sagetrac.org sucks, please consider filing >> >>>> a claim by clicking on "File a claim" at the above URL. Hopefully, >> >>>> if >> >>>> a few people complain, the site will be taken down. >> >> >> >> Tracking number 612381 for me. Apart from mentioning two examples of >> >> posts lifted from copyrighted material, I tried to make the case that >> >> the site is damaging to the reputation of the Sage community, as it >> >> wrongly suggests that we engage in (or condone) this type of activity. >> >> >> >> Interestingly enough, one of the options given in the complaint form >> >> is "cybersquatting", which is the term I would most clearly associate >> >> with this (they found the door open, moved in, changed the locks, kept >> >> some of our furniture but painted the walls a horrible color). >> >> Unfortunately, it seems that the legal definition of "cybersquatting" >> >> involves offering to sell back the domain to the original owner for a >> >> considerable amount, which as far as I know has not happened (yet?). >> >> >> > Perhaps our BDFL can try unleasing UW lawyers on them... >> >> UW is interested, but first the trademark on "Sage" has to get sorted >> out and officially registered. Hiring a law firm to do this *right* >> can take about $5K. However, UW is willing to do this for me for >> free, as long as we -- the community of Sage developers -- are OK with >> University of Washington owning the trademark on "Sage" in the context >> of our software. They tell me that later on they will be willing to >> sell the trademark to me in exchange for the cost they had to pay to >> register it. >> >> So... is anybody opposed to University of Washington become the >> (temporary) register of the Sage trademark? I'm all for it, since I >> am not a lawyer. >> >> -- William > > > On Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8:01:01 PM UTC-7, William wrote: >> >> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Dima Pasechnik <dimp...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > On 2012-05-28, Alex Ghitza <aghi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 27 May 2012 at 10:48AM -0700, William Stein wrote: >> >>>> If you think this abuse of sagetrac.org sucks, please consider filing >> >>>> a claim by clicking on "File a claim" at the above URL. Hopefully, >> >>>> if >> >>>> a few people complain, the site will be taken down. >> >> >> >> Tracking number 612381 for me. Apart from mentioning two examples of >> >> posts lifted from copyrighted material, I tried to make the case that >> >> the site is damaging to the reputation of the Sage community, as it >> >> wrongly suggests that we engage in (or condone) this type of activity. >> >> >> >> Interestingly enough, one of the options given in the complaint form >> >> is "cybersquatting", which is the term I would most clearly associate >> >> with this (they found the door open, moved in, changed the locks, kept >> >> some of our furniture but painted the walls a horrible color). >> >> Unfortunately, it seems that the legal definition of "cybersquatting" >> >> involves offering to sell back the domain to the original owner for a >> >> considerable amount, which as far as I know has not happened (yet?). >> >> >> > Perhaps our BDFL can try unleasing UW lawyers on them... >> >> UW is interested, but first the trademark on "Sage" has to get sorted >> out and officially registered. Hiring a law firm to do this *right* >> can take about $5K. However, UW is willing to do this for me for >> free, as long as we -- the community of Sage developers -- are OK with >> University of Washington owning the trademark on "Sage" in the context >> of our software. They tell me that later on they will be willing to >> sell the trademark to me in exchange for the cost they had to pay to >> register it. >> >> So... is anybody opposed to University of Washington become the >> (temporary) register of the Sage trademark? I'm all for it, since I >> am not a lawyer. >> >> -- William > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
