Sparc Sends SparkFun Electronics C&D Letter 219
moogied writes "SparkFun.com, a electronics component provider, has been sent a cease and desist letter by Sparc in response to the lengthy trademark process that SparkFun is participating in. The letter states 'Because the dominant portion of the SparkFun mark, namely, SPARK, is phonetically identical and nearly visually identical to SI's SPARC mark, and because it is used in connection with identical goods, we believe confusion is likely to occur among the relevant purchasing group.' SparkFun.com has provided the entire contents of the letter, with a breakdown of points it feels are most relevant."
well now (Score:3, Funny)
guess who won't be buying any more sparc servers?
Re:well now (Score:5, Funny)
guess who won't be buying any more sparc servers?
Unless you mean on eBay, I'd say: "Everyone".
Re:well now (Score:5, Funny)
Re:well now (Score:4, Funny)
In other news, a number of large companies have suffered downtime recently from switching from data center servers to Arduinos for their mission critical applications.
But the lawsuit said they were practically the same!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
guess who won't be buying any more sparc servers?
Someone who is not interested in supporting Open Source processors?
SPARC is an organization that licenses processor designs (Scalable Processor ARChitecture), provides docs, and even licenses a keyboard interface design (this part is low cost). I'm not sure what they charge, it may be just a fee for making sure your processor conforms to the sparcv9 spec or similar and you can put the SPARC stamp on your box. I have not heard of them being unreasonable before. It's an independent body. Sun and Fujitsu/S
Re: (Score:2)
It helps to read the article. Spark says they use Sparc servers and are down the street from them. I do not doubt however, that they may threaten business or something as a result. Suing your customers (especially via something that won't likely hold water in court) doesn't earn business.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
you think that thing competes with a Sparc server? I suppose next you're going to think they should sue those people who made an ethernet jack server thing if it were the same name?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Headlines read... (Score:2)
Sparkfun police spoil everything!
Sparc are no fun!
Sparks fly at Sparc!
No more Sparkfun!
Sparc missing from this relationship!
Sparkfun fight begins!
Re: (Score:2)
Good choice. Might I interest you in some SparkFun servers? I know the name looks exactly the same, but it's different if you look closely.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You're asking people with accounts on Slashdot to never reproduce.
I thought it was a given.
Re: (Score:2)
lol. Sure, you post as anonymous coward, but you identify yourself as the parent poster who got modded troll.
Sounds like you need to heed your own advice.
Ich liebe SparC-fun (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Heck, I should work for them, don't you think?
Two problems: :-)
First they might get sued
Second, your address is currently <speedup@wikis[ ]dia.org ['pee' in gap]>.
That's just gross.
I guess if I built a Sparcstation from parts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And to add to the misery... (Score:5, Funny)
...slashdot readers are bringing SparkFun.com to it's knees as we speak.
Stand back, SPARC, we'll take care of this!
Re: (Score:2)
Hahah.
Well, at least network mirror [networkmirror.com] can help for those not interested in destroying sparkfun.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps they're running Sparc servers?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I had no problem reading their post about this, nor did I have any problem firing off an angry mail to K&L.
to: christine.redfield@klgates.com, sparcinfo@sparc.org
cc: spark@sparkfun.com
hi Christine,
your mailbox will probably be clogged, but please lay off you frivolous
trademark claims towards Sparkfun, representing Sparc International. You are
insulting both their customer base suggesting they would confuse one with the
other. My advise to Sun/Sparc Inc is to cancel your contract, as you
obviously have not
Sun should lose (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on, now. They have SPARK in the name; they're an electronics company. The name is a playful moniker and nobody would ever confuse them with Sparc.
When I was in the USAF they called the electricians "spark chasers". ANY electronics company should be able to have "spark" in their name. For Sun to lay claim to a common word that describes the first thing anybody thinks of when they think of electricity (when Sin's is spelled differently) is ludicrous. It's like the ApleFrosting company suing anybody who sells any kind of apple product wit "apple" in the name.
I lost a lot of my esteem for Sun with this. I wonder if it has anything to do with Oracle?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I swear that typoo was unintentional...
In after some FUD (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
"When I was in the USAF they called the electricians "spark chasers"."
They still do, but Sun isn't likely to sue an outfit with Predator UAVs... :)
"
Re:Aren't you required to vigorously defend... (Score:4, Insightful)
You can also offer others a license to use your mark for some nominal fee, I believe. From a legal perspective (IANAL, by the way) I think that's probably just as good as litigating it. The problem probably comes from disagreement about what constitutes a reasonable nominal fee, and the licensee's concerns about their ability to control the use of their mark (eg, if someone who doesn't like the licensee tried to "steal" their mark by going through the licensor).
Re:Aren't you required to vigorously defend... (Score:5, Informative)
Aren't you required to vigorously defend your trademark or else stand to lose it?
Yeah, it may be ridiculous, and yeah, a judge may decide that it is indeed ridiculous as well. But they -still- have to go through these claims in order to vigorously defend.
Vigorous defense of one's trademark does not demand that one pursue ridiculous or even questionable claims. All it means is that you can't knowingly allow violation of your trademark, then attempt to enforce it later. Where a case appears legally questionable, or outright stupid, there is absolutely no duty to pursue it. All the normal rules of civil procedure apply, including Rule 11. "Vigorous defense of trademark" is not a defense for filing a claim unsupported by law.
Re:Aren't you required to vigorously defend... (Score:5, Informative)
That's a very narrow interpretation. If you allow your trademark to be diluted, then you weaken your ability to defend it later, even with more meritorious claims against different infringers.
Failure to defend a trademark can be used to overturn the trademark assignment if contested.
IANAL, obviously. But I've been responsible for trademarks at several employers, and had lengthy conversations with attorneys on the matter -- this is just my understanding based on those conversations. Of course, since they IP attorneys get paid to contest infringing use, they are motivated to ensure I want to vigorously defend my trademarks...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"Vigorous defense of trademark" is not a defense for filing a claim unsupported by law.
Here's the issue: the only place where questions of law are settled is a court room. Which in turn means that the only way to find out whether something is unsupported by law is to file a lawsuit and see where the chips fall.
Yes, some cases are highly unlikely to succeed. I doubt Sun would be able to successfully sue the Pope for trademark infringement. But I don't think that anyone here knows enough law to unequivocally state that this claim is unsupported by law.
Re:Aren't you required to vigorously defend... (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's the issue: the only place where questions of law are settled is a court room. Which in turn means that the only way to find out whether something is unsupported by law is to file a lawsuit and see where the chips fall.
That is not a correct conclusion. Questions of law are only settled by the court, but many questions have already been settled. An attorney's job is to research existing law (both statutes and prior cases that have been decided in court) and make a prediction about what should happen if a new case is taken to court. Sometimes it's impossible to reach a conclusion, other times the conclusion is nearly certain; usually it's in between. The rules of ethics and of civil procedure prohibit attorneys from bringing suit when their argument is unsupported by existing law or a reasonable extension of existing law. This is rarely enforced with vigor, because there is often some type of legitimate argument that can be made to support even a very weak case - but not always.
But I don't think that anyone here knows enough law to unequivocally state that this claim is unsupported by law.
Don't be too sure about that. I'm not a trademark attorney, so I wouldn't venture a conclusive opinion about this case without doing some additional research first - but some here may be qualified to do so. With that said, my prior post was not intended to state that this case is meritless. I don't think it is. I think it's weak, but plausible. It's weak on the facts, not the law. If I were SPARC's attorney, I would have discouraged them from pursuing it.
Re: (Score:2)
file a lawsuit and see where the chips fall.
this is soon to be oracle. they don't just drop chips, they cancel whole entire projects!
Re: (Score:2)
Well sure, but do you expect a lawyer getting paid by the hour to take that chance with his client mone--uh trademarks?
Re:Aren't you required to vigorously defend... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Trademarks aren't really that clear-cut. It's not like copyright; verbatim reproduction of the mark is not a key element of the offense. Trademark infringement is defined in terms of the potential for consumer confusion.
Now, if you mean to say that because the C is part of what makes the SPARC mark distinct, and therefore a name containing Spark (spelled correctly) isn't likely to cause confusion, you'd have a viable - but subjective - point. In fact that would be my basis for siding with SparkFun at the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I might agree with you, but their trademark is "SPARC", not "Spark".
I guess you're that one person who always pronouces it "spar-see" ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Aren't you required to vigorously defend... (Score:4, Insightful)
That doesn't mean you're obligated to make over-reaching claims about your trademark. The obviously correct position would be to send C&D letters to people using 'sparc' without permission. Perhaps even to a company that sold "spark servers". That's all that's needed. Their trademark on "SPARC" would not be weakened at all by the continued existence of "SparkFun".
Re: (Score:2)
Try selling a cola named 'koke fun' or 'pepze fun' and see how long it takes for the law suits to start rolling in. The name is not exact, but it is close enough to elicit a miss-understanding, at least in spoken English.
Re: (Score:2)
(at least) two problems:
1) A cola is exactly the same product as Coke and Pepsi, so you are clearly in the same market. SparkFun does not produce computers. The better analogy would be something along the lines of selling cookies or some other product in the "food products" but not "drinks" realm.
2) Coke and Pepsi are both fairly unique words and don't have strong associations with drinks or foods other than by virtue of the trademarked product names. It'd be extremely difficult to come up with a convinci
Re:Aren't you required to vigorously defend... (Score:5, Insightful)
Aren't you required to vigorously defend your trademark or else stand to lose it?
If they were genuinely concerned about losing their trademark, while admitting that SparkFun is not at all likely to be confused with Sparc, they could grant SparkFun trademark rights for $1. Basically tell them "we agree not to sue you for infringing what we believe is our rightful trademark, in exchange for consideration".
I'm tired of that damn "the law made me do it!" excuse. No, it didn't. There are plenty of remedies outside the courts that can accomplish the same ends.
Re:Aren't you required to vigorously defend... (Score:5, Insightful)
Scumbag lawyers don't get paid when gentlemen act like gentlemen and do things like that.
This is about scumbag IP lawyers chasing ambulances looking for money.
Re: (Score:2)
sudo mod parent up
and while you are at it... (Score:2)
sudo make me a sandwich.
tips hat to XKCD...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Holy crap! an entire industry sells things called Spark Plugs! Sparc needs to send in troops to Bosch and Delco and sue everyone!! SUE SUE SUE!
Honestly, it should be written in that law that if your "defense" is completely stupid, you muse pay 2 million plus court costs to your victim.
In this case, their defense is completely and utterly stupid. I think the CEO needs the death penalty over this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Although that excuse is used frequently, you are NOT required to behave like a braying ass and sue the whole world for using a common English word that sounds like your misspelling as part of their name. You can even defend your mark by giving the other guy a friendly call and each agreeing to point out that you're not the other guy.
I have worked on sparcstations and have visited sparkfun.com many times. I have never been at all confused nor have I even suspected that one might own the other.
Re: (Score:2)
Who wrote the rule about vigorously defending trade-marks? The principle beneficiaries of risible litigation.
What cracks me up is the implication by Sparc Industries that their customer base is, in the main, dumber than a bag of hammers. If I were a customer of Sparc Industries, I think I'd have grounds here for a class action defamation of character suit.
I lost to a damn ventriloquist?! (Ah-CHOO!) (Score:2)
Jeff Dunham had a comedy central special called Spark Of Insanity - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epsx2dlQQ6k [youtube.com]
I could go on.
The difference there, though, is I think I would wholeheartedly support any kind of legal action against Jeff Dunham...
"Dominant Portion" (Score:2, Insightful)
And here I thought that dominant portion of SparkFun was "Fun"!
Re: (Score:2)
RTFA (heck RTFS)
This has *nothing* to do with Sun. They are the 'other' SPARC that has no bearing on this particular battle (although would have been a better target if it weren't for the fact they've been around WAY longer than the SPARC mark benchmark and have more lawyers)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't wait (Score:2)
The counter-suit should be interesting. Hey, maybe SPARC would like to hire Darl to take care of that? I hear he's looking for work now.
I think it just highlights (Score:5, Funny)
FARC (Score:4, Funny)
So when is the FARC [wikipedia.org] going to send Fark.com [fark.com] a C&D?
Next thing you know (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't wait for IBM to sue BMW because after all, both of them share the letters "BM" and that might confuse a lot of people. Disney could probably have a go at McDonald's because after all, Donald is the name of a famous Disney character....
Hopefully Sparkfun won't get a retarded judge, and this will be laughed out of court.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Or better, for PARC to sue SPARC. At least they're the same industry, "sound similar", use all caps in the name, etc. But that's right, it's just easier to go after the little guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Just checking
Umm (Score:2, Insightful)
IANAL, but Sparc International has a legal obligation to protect its trademark, correct? They may not want to pick on SparkFun but if they don't demonstrably protect their trademark, they can lose it.
How do you protect your trademark without sending out C&Ds?
Re:Umm (Score:4, Insightful)
IANAL, but Sparc International has a legal obligation to protect its trademark, correct? They may not want to pick on SparkFun but if they don't demonstrably protect their trademark, they can lose it.
How do you protect your trademark without sending out C&Ds?
In my perfect world (I put that in because otherwise some /. smartass will tell me how things really are, thanks) you wouldn't need to "protect" your trademark against obviously non-infringing non-assaults. And also in my perfect world, you would be penalized for sending out frivolous C&Ds when you should have known better. Again, in my ideal world, a panel of people with common sense would decide when you would have known better. Furthermore, in my perfect world, you will all agree with me and get together and take up a collection to buy me a fully functional animatronic Natalie Portman.
Re: (Score:2)
in my perfect world, you will all agree with me and get together and take up a collection to buy me a fully functional animatronic Natalie Portman.
Dude, it's your perfect world.. why not just go for the gusto and wish for the actual Natalie Portman?
Well that would just be greedy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How do you protect your trademark without sending out C&Ds?
You can license it, but more importantly, you have to decide what infringes and what doesn't. If the name of the company was "SparkServ" or similar, then the standard of "is likely to create confusion in the marketplace" applies. Additionally, if there are other details in the use of "SparkFun" as a trademark that would cause confusion (ie: ripping off the look and feel of the registered mark) then you have a case.
This is like Darl McBride sui
Re: (Score:2)
I want to see how this plays out. Sparc International and SparkFun aren't direct competitors but they are both in the electronics biz. It's a bit of a stretch but I'd grant that there is the potential for confusion. I'd hope that Sparc sent the letter as a beginning for negotiations and is aiming to sign an agreement with SparkFun that allows both companies to feel that their trademarks are secure for future usage. If it ends with SparkFun being forced to change their name, that will be a pretty big black e
Re:Umm (Score:5, Insightful)
How do you protect your trademark without sending out C&Ds?
Dang - I just posted the answer above. But to recap: you license it. Sell the "offending" party the right to continue using their name for the minimum dollar amount necessary to create a binding contract (which I think is traditionally $1). That way they're in the clear, and in the event that someone else infringes in the future, you can prove that you're aware and have dealt with other infringers in the past.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How do you protect your trademark without sending out C&Ds?
Contact the very nice folks at SparkFun and ask, "Pardon -- could you put a disclaimer on your 'About' page or 'FAQ' stating that you are not associated with Sparc? That way we have our 'You must defend your trademark' ass covered, but we don't have to be dicks about it."
Oh, great... (Score:3, Funny)
Wait... what? (Score:2, Funny)
So SPARC now lays claim to http://www.*sparc*.* as well as http://www.*spark*.*
Does this mean I can't register www.sparccankissmyass.com without getting a C&D letter?
Re: (Score:2)
It depends. Do you plan on selling microprocessors?
So...Much...Chickenshit... (Score:3, Insightful)
So SPARC is something like SPARK...
And some nitwit company that has seen its stock price fall a huge percentage because it spends far too much on psychotic lawyers than it does on R&D is filing a lawsuit about 'Spark' being close to 'sparc'. And this idiot lawyers have convinced someone that they 'own' the word 'spark'.
Am I reading this correct? Please tell me that this is not Sun Microsystems! Founded by geniuses, creators and leaders in the workstation industry, the true visionary company of the valley.
You would think that these guys would be too embarrassed to show their faces in the valley again after something as stupid as this.
These guys have no shame.
Since the world's population is bursting and there is ...so...much....surplus...talent available, why don't we just put all these dumb fucks out of their (and our) misery. "take out the trash, clean out the crusty, and let them spend the rest of their days walking through the streets of SoHo in the rain."
What! There's a law against that too? Law or no law, sooner or later, it's going to be cheaper just to kill them all.
It's a shame that with all their education and vested options, they still don't realize this.
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell me that this is not Sun Microsystems!
It's not Sun Microsystems, Inc. It's SPARC International, Inc.
Sun is just a member company.
Okay! I'll say it! (Score:2)
This is not Sun Microsystems!
It is SPARC International.
There are you happy now?
Perhaps you are a bit quick on the draw with your unwarranted criticism.
Other sites with better summaries (Score:3, Funny)
(Removed by user)
I don't want all of my hacker/maker sites slashdotted at once!
This is great advertising (Score:3, Insightful)
I've ordered from both companies... (Score:3, Interesting)
You are misguided (Score:2)
It is NOT Sun. It is SPARC Inrternational.
Point your enthusiasm and anger in a more productive direction, please.
God help the auto industry.... (Score:4, Funny)
...what are they going to call sparkplugs now?
Re: (Score:2)
Sun386i-plugs?
anyone with an actual need for (Score:3, Insightful)
The population of actual electronic component customers likely to mistake SPARC for SparkFun is exactly zero. There is NO public likely to be confused by this.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
hm.. Sparc International's an industry trade association setup by Sun some 10 years ago.
Basically, SPARC members are the companies that make SPARC-compatible devices.
My biggest issue with SPARC's sudden claim is that SparkFun has been around for 10 years, and well-known to the public.
Basically, it seems like they have sat on their rights for a long time, and waited way too long before taking any action.
They ought not to be allowed to proceed with their claim.
Clan McDonald (Score:3, Interesting)
The Guardians of Clan Donald
(Na Dionadairean Clann Dhomhnuill)
By authority of Lord Macdonald,
Premier Clan Chief of Clan Donald.
22 Dunecht Road, Westhill, Aberdeenshire, AB32 6RH.
Tele: 01224 740073
PRESS RELEASE
Lord Macdonald of Macdonald, premier clan chief of Clan Donald, has appointed Ronald W McDonald to be Sergeant-Major at Arms of the Guardians of Clan Donald: the linear descendant of the chief's bodyguard. It will be open to all Macdonalds and their septs, dependents, and descendants, who are in good standing in the community. Successful applicants will be enlisted as Sergeants at Arms and issued with a Warrant in the form of a Certificate which is suitable for framing. The cost of membership is £1 (postal orders please) or £2 sterling for overseas applicants.
The Guardians of Clan Donald aim to uphold and protect the dignity and honour of the ancient and honourable name of Clan Donald by all legal means. One specific aim is to offer moral support to Mary Blair, proprietor of McMunchies, a small sandwich bar in Fenny Stratford, Buckinghamshire, who is being threatened with legal action by McDonald's Restaurants, the fast food chain, for daring to use the prefix "Mc" in the name of her shop. When interviewed in BBC2's "The Money Programme" a top trademark lawyer made it clear that McDonald's have not a legal leg to stand on. Instead they rely on their unlimited financial resources to bully small businesses who cannot afford to fight back.
This type of business ethics might be good practice in the USA but it is singularly un-British. McDonald's have registered most names beginning with 'Mc' as trademarks, not with any intention of using them, but to try and stop anyone of that name setting up a restaurant. Even my own name Ronald McDonald has been registered as one of their trademarks. This is an attack on Scottish culture when even our very names are hijacked.
It has been stated by government ministers that a person is fully entitled to use their own name for business. But McDonald's has grown so large it is supra-national, with an advertising budget bigger than the Gross National Product of many countries. It is time that the government took in hand this matter of bullying of small businesses by companies such as McDonald' s. Perhaps this might be a subject for debate by a future Scottish Parliament.
If McDonald's persists in its action against McMunchies they are disgracing the ancient and honourable name of Macdonald. In the days when a clan chief had the power of pit and gallows the ultimate penalty for shaming the clan name was to be flung over a cliff but it seems unlikely that any executive of McDonald's Restaurants would volunteer for this!
Injustice and bullying are matters that concerns everyone and not just those affiliated to one clan. To this end, the Guardians of Clan Donald have decided to launch a petition calling upon McDonald's Restaurants to drop their action against Mary Blair of McMunchies Sandwich Bar. Petitions should be sent to the Guardians of Clan Donald or direct to McDonald's Restaurants, 11-59 High Road, East Finchley, London N2 8AW. (Fax Number 0181-700 7050 Telephone 0181-700 7000). A personal letter, telephone call or fax to McDonald's condemning their action is also effective.
Any assistance from the media would be much appreciated.
Back to Media Page
Press Index
Wha...? (Score:2)
Likely to cause confusion in the minds of purchasers? What are they smoking?
I've bought bits off SparkFun in the past. It never even occurred to me that there was a vague similarity between them and SPARC international until I heard about the C&D letter. Not even a moron would confuse Sparc International and SparkFun. Different logos, only tangentally related markets (they both are involved in the pushing around of electrons, but one designs CPUs, the other has instructions on how to solder tricky packa
WTF are they talking about? (Score:2)
So then... (Score:2)
Will they be suing Sun Microsystems, or will Sun be suing them?
Nikola Tesla wants his spark back (Score:2)
Geez I know Sparc has been slowly dying for last decade but this is getting kinda desperate.
An observation (Score:2)
In the case of the SPARC v. Sparkfun it's just some attorneys with a hair across their ass.
Re:so let me get this straight (Score:5, Informative)
Sun named their product line after a natural phenomenon, a spark, and is now going after any one using the natural phenomenon's namesake?
No. Sun Microsystems is a member of Sparc International, along with a slew of other companies (TI, Hitachi, Fujitsu, etc, etc -- http://www.sparc.org/members.html [sparc.org]), but Sparc International != Sun.
Re:so let me get this straight (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Legal attack?
Google Safe Browsing Report (Score:5, Informative)
Yikes.
http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?site=http://www.sparc.org/&hl=en [google.com]
What is the current listing status for sparc.org?
Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer.
Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 9 time(s) over the past 90 days.
What happened when Google visited this site?
Of the 244 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 3 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2009-10-22, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2009-10-22.
Malicious software includes 12 trojan(s), 8 exploit(s), 6 scripting exploit(s). Successful infection resulted in an average of 2 new process(es) on the target machine.
Malicious software is hosted on 6 domain(s), including keymydomains.com/, ncenterpanel.cn/, updatedate.cn/.
2 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including keymydomains.com/, specialgt.com/.
This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS21844 (THEPLANET).
Re: (Score:2)
Arms length can include "by the throat". I'm pretty sure that Sparc International went to Sun (and maybe a few others) to vet this first, just in case it was a life raft for rats scurrying overboard.
Losing the last bit of goodwill is just what Sun needs right now.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Lawyers love to make work for their own which is why lawyers should
Re: (Score:2)
I know you were labeled Troll, but I'll bite:
No, Sun didn't name SPARC after a natural phenomenon. SPARC stands for Scalable Processor ARChitecture, so that makes it an acronym which happens to sound just like the English word "spark."
Re:Happens all the time (Score:4, Insightful)
Yep. All you need is one jumped-up shyster snake...er "lawyer"... and we're off to the races again.
If SPARC, or their parent corp Sun Microsystems, wants to be good citizens, the lawyer who sent this should lose his job.
Re: (Score:2)
When a society actively punishes a behavior, I find it difficult to call that behavior a requirement for being a good citizen.
If the lawyer were dismissed from SPARC's legal team, then this would discourage proactive defense of the SPARC trademark. If the trademark isn't proactively protected, then it will lose legal standing. The legislature has specifically attached negative consequences to the behavior you're suggesting; so no, I don't think that's what SPARC or Sun have to do to be a good citizen.
Trad
Re:Happens all the time (Score:4, Insightful)
And in general, you cannot trademark an English word when used for descriptive purposes. Given that SparkFun makes products that when constructed by hobbyists, almost certainly do precisely what their name implies, in order for SparkFun to be infringing, SPARC would have to claim that they hold the trademark for the word "Spark" when used descriptively, which simply cannot be the case. My prediction? If this went to court, SPARC would almost certainly get their asses handed to them, and SparkFun would probably get treble damages in their countersuit.
Re: (Score:2)
RE/tarded.
I didn't know there was a new Resident Evil game...
ah, you could read the sparkfun blog. (Score:2)
Yes that same remark tickled my funny bone too. Too bad you needed the karma that bad to repost/plagiarize it.