[Arm-netbook] eoma and qimod

[Boris Barbour]

Maybe it is worth taking stock. At this stage the project will probably 
benefit from some clarity as to how much mischief your (ex-)associates 
can make.

On 22/06/14 12:45, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

 > as we've been working commission-only basis for 4 years quite happily

Who paid whom?

>   well, i designed them all: i never signed anything which *explicitly*
> handed over the copyright of the designs. i also own the copyright on
> the *text* of what is on the elinux.org web site, which is as you know
> under a creative commons license.

So they probably don't own the copyright to the designs (some of which 
are gpl'd?) or the text, which seems to include the specification. 
Presumably that text counts as prior art if anybody tries to get clever 
with patents.

So that just leaves the trademark? A new name is hardly the end of the 
world. If it's definitely required, just get it over with*. However, 
maybe your associates should realise that all over the web "eoma" is 
associated with long-haired, sandal-wearing freetards and it would 
really be in their interest to change the name of their system to 
something new and shiny.

If your associates actually end up making some hardware that runs free 
software, that's probably still a good thing. If the systems remain 
compatible, then that's also a good thing. If not, good luck to them.

Best,

Boris

* Modular SOC: MOSOC. MOSOC-68? (Goodle doesn't seem to find an obvious 
clash.) Or maybe Ice-something?