 | | LegOS forced to use another name? —Ross Crawford
|
| | | Article here: (URL) TLC may be talking to Marcus Noga about his use of "LegOS" for the open-source operating system for the Mindstorms RCX (see last page). I can see their point. Personally, I think "NogOS" has a bit of a ring to it 8?) What does (...) (23 years ago, 9-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch) !
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Luis Villa
|
| | | | | Having registered legOS.sourceforge.net (on Markus's word that TLG had given him permission to use the name), having run the last release of legOS, and having not heard anything from TLG myself, I can say that there are no plans in this corner of (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | (...) Yeah, I saw your post on slashdot after I'd posted the link here. As you say, if they don't defend their trademark within a reasonable time, they lose the right to do so. I guess the best course of action in this case is "no action"!! ROSCO (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Troy Cefaratti
|
| | | | | | (...) So, if they had sued him 2.5 years ago, you would have supported them? Just wondering. It's because of thinking like this that most companies would have sued him long ago... Troy PS: I thought it was just common sense, atleast around here, (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Michael Ash
|
| | | | | | (...) In the US, at least, a trademark *must* be defended, or the company loses it. If legOS does, in fact, infringe on their trademark, they would have had to defend it pretty quickly or that usage would pass into the public domain. Or something (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | RE: LegOS forced to use another name? —Ralph Hempel
|
| | | | | Ross crawford points to: (...) I can see their point too. As long as it's only about the name then I can't see anyone getting too upset. It's just a name, after all. But if it's about the replacement firmware, then I have more to worry about. So do (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Paul Gyugyi
|
| | | | | They can't possibly do that. According to many published accounts, TLC explicitly says that their product is not to be referred to as "legos" but rather as "LEGO brand building bricks". Therefore, TLC has given up rights to the use of the word (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Mark Sandlin
|
| | | | | (...) Hmmm, does this mean they're acknowledging that people call them "legos" ? ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) see (...) I think it's similar enough to LEGO that they'd have had a reasonable case if they'd fought it earlier. But now it's debatable whether they'd have any case at all. ROSCO (IANAL) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Ka-On Lee
|
| | | | | (...) from that tiny yellow box? So it got a generic CPU that can read voltage from 3 ports and can adjust 3 power outputs. Really cutting-edge stuff there... That article is just full of you-know-what. (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Matthew Gerber
|
| | | | | | (...) You ain't just whistlin' Dixie here Ka-On... Off-topic time: Typical "Time Magazine type" twist on the story here...I hate reading Time because every story seems to be written with an antagonistic bent, trying to stir up trouble, instead of (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Juergen Stuber
|
| | | | | (...) I think this is speculation by the author of the article. Apart from the issue about names and trademarks, for me this article shows an extremely irritating attitude towards customers, sue people as soon as they use something in a different (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Stelios Kalogreades
|
| | | | | | (...) I agree with you, Jürgen. It seems that we have to contend with taht viewpoint though. Hopefully if any of tyhe new product line doesn't do as well as expected, we will not see some genius in the company decide to go after people who add value (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Troy Cefaratti
|
| | | | | | The way I read the article it didn't seem that they were so much upset that he had come up with the new OS, but rather that he had named it legOS. No matter how you look at it, or what excuse he can come up for choosing that name, it is pushing the (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) I concur. If I manufactured a new extra-cushiony disk storage system that used *really* tiny sponges for support, and I called it Micro-Soft, I'm sure I'd get a letter. This particular case has the added spin of stepping soundly into the "LEGO (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Stelios Kalogreades
|
| | | | | | Ok, I agree with the *possibility* of the name being a problem, but I am more concerned about the hacks themselves being contested instead. However, LegOS is NOT for commercial purposes, so that should be a factor to consider here. I wouldn't be AS (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Dennis Clark
|
| | | | | | (...) OK, lets not make a mountain out of a molehill here. LEGO very clearly and often stated in that letter that they encourage the creation and use of our third party OS's and such. What they (rightly) wish to protect is the dillution of their (...) (23 years ago, 11-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Stelios Kalogreades
|
| | | | | | (...) Dennis, I do agree that Lego has been very nice about this; in my first post, I stated that their stance on these matters was one of the things that rekindled my Lego addiction. I admired their action (or lack thereof) as far as Mindstorms was (...) (23 years ago, 12-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Tomas Clark
|
| | | | | FYI, there is now a posting in lugnet.lego.announce that should help to clarify this issue: (URL) set to FUT lugnet.lego.direct because of some rules (that I still don't quite get) about where official messages can be posted and followed-up to, but (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LegOS forced to use another name? —Markus L. Noga
|
| | | | Hello everybody, there has been a lot of discussion about the Business 2.0 article in their forums, on Slashdot and here at LUGNET. I followed all of them closely until Tuesday afternoon, but rather less so in the days since. I also received several (...) (23 years ago, 13-Sep-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Update to Business 2.0 Article (was: LegOS forced to use another name?) —Matthew Gerber
|
| | | | This update to the article discussed in this thread is taken from the November 2001 issue of Business 2.0. It isn't on (URL) so I thought I would run it through OCR and post it here for everyone to see. LUGNET gets a mention (but not a URL), and the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Oct-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.general, lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | |
