Linux distro creator tries to enforce a trademark he doesn't own | Hacker News Reader

Linux distro creator tries to enforce a trademark he doesn't own

github.com

64 pointsddtaylor50 comments

In fairness, trademarks don't have to be registered to be trademarks (edit: as cassidyjames said, but I skimmed over). Also:

> but I absolutely do not want to go the legal threat route and that's not what this issue was; this issue is me requesting you respect the elementary name and don't use it for something that is not produced by elementary. Because as we've seen repeatedly in the past, it causes real user confusion about the source and endorsement of software.

Yep, came to say exactly this. cassidyjames seems to be completely in the right here, and isn't even doing anything crazy. krisives is the problem.

Agreed, the request was very polite and seems totally reasonable. While I don’t think you can call digging up public fillings dox-ing, I don’t see any reason for the developer not to respect the request.

https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/BasicFac...

Page 11

> Is federal registration of my mark required?

> No. In the United States, parties are not required to register their marks to obtain protectable rights. You can establish "common law" rights in a mark based solely on use of the mark in commerce, without a registration.

I have read that the US is also "first use" and not "first to file", eliminating a race to registration.

Correct, but those marks are limited to the specific areas where you practice business, whereas federal trademarks grant you the mark outside of only the areas where you practice business.

Federal trademarks grant you the mark in areas you apply for. And you can still lose it.

Yup, I also made a comment saying that we are absolutely not threatening legal action, nobody here is a lawyer, and it's only a request. So he deleted it

You mean the comment where you claim that you were being harassed?

Yes, the repo owner is trying to make it seem like elementary is threatening legal action, which again we aren't, and after not responding to any private communication, refusing to take down a link to a private residence, and continuing to draw attention on social media they were banned from our online communities for harassment and doxxing which goes against our code of conduct.

Didn't he link to a public document part of an attempted trademark filing?

But why is that interesting? Neither of them are lawyers, and you don't need the federal government to grant a trademark to have one.

If someone wishes to address the issue on strictly legal grounds, such as by contending there is no trademark protection, then there is no choice but to bring in lawyers... All further discussion after that is just nonsense, such as the discussion of how Ubuntu uses their trademark — there's no point in trying to develop your own internal legal theory by reasoning with Ubuntu as a proxy.

Because it shows that the trademark was rejected.

This has certainly soured my view of the Elementary OS project. Someone has created a project to help himself and other users and chose an obvious name for it, then a representative from the company behind it wants the name changed and threatens legal action if they don't?

Regardless of the actual trademark status at hand, they decided that they would rather burn a bridge with a dedicated user who spent their free time to improve their product and in a way to provoke fear of legal costs. Why wouldn't he look for supporting data to offset that legal threat?

They're literally abusing the power imbalance in this situation to try to get things done their way, and I don't understand how anyone in here is siding with them?

There was never any legal threat, in fact I try to clarify that repeatedly. The user kept steering it to a poor understanding of trademark law and then publicly uploaded documents with a physical address in response.

This user has been repeatedly disruptive in the subreddit and Slack before this incident, and then they go and publicly doxx someone? There is zero tolerance for that behavior.

If that was true, you never would have brought up trademarks in the very first post of the issue?

You don't "want" to use the legal threat of trademark law, but you'll dangle it in front to try and coerce your desired behavior.

And there's no doxxing here. That's a legal document he pulled up that's publicly available.

Diluting a brand and trademark is something that can and does happen and does not imply a threat whatsoever. I clarified that multiple times.

And uploading legal filings with private addresses in them and publicly associating with a GitHub user account in response to me opening a GitHub issue is absolutely doxxing. It was not necessary at all, and they refuse to remove it.

The only address I see is the one for an LLC, which is also a public address?

If you mean the email address, it's just your first name and your company, which is the same name you're using for HN and Github? How are they not already publicly associated?

Please, just "mea culpa" that you got off on the wrong foot here, unban the guy, and work out this situation slowly over time. The repo has only 2 stars!

Your ridiculous overreaction is what makes me never want to touch Elementary. I don't want to make this about me, but I'm in your customer profile, typing this on a System76 laptop and having a PineBook Pro sitting next to me. I want to pay OSS companies for quality work! You should really think about what you're doing here and what kind of reputation you want your company to have amongst your potential customers.

I guess an LLC has _never_ been started out of someones garage /s

Just because it's publicly available doesn't mean it can or should be broadcast for all the world to see.

krisives took the time to download the document and mark it part of the repository so _at the very least_ they should have redacted any PII.

Yes, if they were perfectly fine with using that address in public records they should understand that it will be searchable, tying the business to that address.

There are tons of cheap services[1] to provide obfuscated business addresses for LLCs very cheaply, and by the time you're navigating filing documentation for legal trademarks I would expect this to be a known solution, as their legal counsel should've brought it up when they were establishing the LLC in the first place.

[1]: https://www.noobpreneur.com/2018/05/04/how-to-use-a-virtual-...

This is one of your comment from the Github thread,

> ...which affords certain protections under US trademark law and has enabled elementary to prevent people from distributing other items under our brand name—but regardless this issue is in no way a legal threat as much as you want to insinuate...

Honesty, it looks like a legal threat to me despite claiming otherwise given your other comments on the Github thread have been on the legality of your request.

Also, claiming the repo owner has a poor understanding of trademark law when you are not a lawyer reflects poorly on you. If you wanted to change their name to "Unofficial elementaryOS Tweaks" - just ask nicely without getting into legal gobbledygook.

That's actually the edited version, the original one stated:

> ...which affords certain protections under US trademark law and has enabled elementary to prevent people from distributing other items under our brand name—but I absolutely do not want to go the legal threat route

Which is much more of an "it'd be a shame if something happened" kind of phrasing.

Yeah, but it also clearly states that they don't want to go the legal threat route. So I don't know. I think that thsi think was clearly mishandled by both sides

I don't want to break your legs but you should stop parking your car in front of my house.

It's not a threat because I said I don't want to break your legs.

The response from the repo owner is so bizarre. I believe Cassidy presented his viewpoint (on behalf of the org) pretty straightforward and "nicely", and it feels like the repo maintainer is just trying to play the technicality/gotcha game, and not respond to the original request.

From a discussion standpoint, krisives is indirectly saying they don't believe there's a valid trademark in here, and so they're indirectly saying they don't want to change the name. OK. If you have no intentions of complying with the polite request, just say so. It's sort of a jerk move (in my opinion), but OK I guess. Then elementary can bring about legal stuff if they wanna go that route. Why cause all this drama?

Also, this sort of thing happens quite often in the community, for open source projects and not. Being polite to other OSS maintainers goes a long way.

Which part do you think was "a jerk move"

I think you mis-read me - what I was saying is, if the repo maintainers wanna just say no, we don't wanna comply - they're fine to do that I guess, I personally think it would be sort of a jerk move. Renaming something on Github is trivial. It's a bizarre hill to die on.

Wow elementaryos in full lockdown damage control mode!

Banned krisives from their Slack instance (where they told him to DM them) and also banned him from the elementaryos subreddit.

Now this story has been [flagged] here.

Orwellian. I will never touch anything elementaryos.

The user (who appears to have posted this link, btw, based on recent post history) has been disruptive in the subreddit and Slack in the past, and then literally started publicly doxxing _and_ going around to social media to draw public attention to the post. I messaged them on Slack and they ignored it, continued to post in the thread, and continued posting on social media to draw attention to it. There's zero tolerance for doxxing in the elementary community, so they've been banned in accordance to the elementary Code of Conduct.

You are in the right if that's all true. But the fact that you are banning him/her right when there is a ongoing disagreement makes me question the validity of your claim.

They uploaded documents with my personal information in them when it was not even necessary to discuss the issue. They refuse to remove the documents at my request. They continue to draw attention to the post on social media. That's absolutely ban-worthy behavior.

Weren't those public documents you submitted for a trademark request?

Those documents were public, and central evidense upon which an argument rests.

> The user (who posted this link, btw )

Wait, does that mean you're now "doxxing" people?

The Slack/reddit ban and the grotesque doxxing accusations are exactly why these conversations must happen in the open. Your histrionic replies to both the GitHub issue and the comments here are just further proofs for me that I should never touch anything elementaryos related.

You failed epically and instead of issuing a mea culpa you just doubled down for the whole world to see.

"Orwellian"? "Grotesque"? "histrionic"?

How about "hyperbole"?

Actually, it's you who doxxed yourself when you choose to use your residential address for a LLC. They just shared a searchable, public domain document.

May I suggest "Unofficial elementaryOS Tweaks"?

I think it would solve the problem (basically impossible to believe it is official), and would be legal, at least where I live in the US (falls under "nominative use").

Would it be legal though considering their brand name is still being used as part of the name?

IANAL, but I believe it would fall under fair use, specifically nominative use: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use

The existing name might 'suggest sponsorship or endorsement' by Elementary Inc, but my version does not.

Thanks that's a great link.

The FAQ section in README.md could also clarify this up front: "Q: Is this official/endorsed? A: Nope"

Yeah that would be fine. :)

Wow, what a hostile way to ask for a name change: go straight for the legal angle.

> We already have enough issues with people thinking the old “elementary Tweaks” was something official or made by elementary—which is why it was rebranded by its developer to “Pantheon Tweaks.” Creating a new project under the elementary name that is not made by elementary is inviting similar issues and could contribute to dilution of the elementary brand and trademarks.

> https://elementary.io/brand

> Please rename this project to something that does not include the elementary name to avoid similar issues.

I don't see how that's hostile.

You only need to read the follow up comments.

I did and the only hostility I see is from krisives, frankly.

Care to elaborate?

That thread really degraded fast. I think maybe elementary needs to graduate to middle school before more people come to the playground.

(bad puns, seeing myself out)

Spicy. Drama only 35 minutes (or 6 hours) old and it’s already blowing up here at 1 UPM (upvote per minute).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com