[Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Jonathan Frederickson
<silverskullpsu at gmail.com> wrote:
>> if you check 30 seconds in the connector is completely different (otherwise intel would have a Certification Mark infringment case on their hands)
>
> Wait, how?

 *CERTIFICATION* mark.  *NOT* **TRADE**mark.

> It's a pre-existing connector. How do you have any control
> over Intel's use of PCMCIA?

 i don't.  nobody does.  you've misunderstood.

> Now if they'd *called* it EOMA68, or EOMA68-compatible, or some
> such... then sure.

 that's Trademark infringment, which is completely different.
CERTIFICATION mark infringment is based on STANDARDS.  a Trademark is
based on a PRODUCT or a brand..

 you cannot apply for a Trademark on a STANDARD.

 you cannot apply for a Certification Mark on a PRODUCT or BRAND

 you can apply for a Certification Mark on the H.264 STANDARD (if you
were the copyright holder)

 you cannot apply for a TRADEMARK on the H.264 STANDARD.

 does that help clarify the difference?

 in fact now i think about it, intel probably are actually infringing
the Certification Mark by having a product that could be *CONFUSED*
with EOMA68 computer cards.   PCMCIA doesn't matter so much: it's on
its way out.

 but if intel's "compute card" can in *any way* cause people to go
back to the shop and complain, "i bought this thing i don't know what
it is, it looks the same, i plugged it in and it didn't work, i tried
jamming it in really hard and it still didn't work" or worse, having
two items on the shelves and people even REMOTELY considering that
they're the same just because the size and casing is "about the right
size and about the right colour", that's enough to be a CERTIFICATION
mark infringment, if the CERTIFICATION mark (the standard) says "the
size must be 54 x 86 x 5mm".