[Arm-netbook] pyra computer

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

if specific to one country that would be fine chris.  EOMA68  like
HDMI and BLE is not intended for one country.  it's global.
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 2:50 PM, Christopher Havel
<laserhawk64 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Another quick phone post.
>
> YedIf the problem with my idea is the word "certified" - DON'T USE THAT
> WORD IN THE LOGO but require it somewhere nearby in a local language to the
> intended geographic region where the device is to be sold.
>
> Also, the very idea of my two levels, two labels approach is to avoid
> confusion. This isn't rocket science. Put away the hydrazine lol.
>
> On Feb 15, 2018 7:34 AM, "Jean Flamelle" <eaterjolly at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >  nobody gets confused, world-wide, about the Certification Mark "BLE"
>> > or the Certification Mark "HDMI".
>> >
>> >  argh can't read the rest too busy, so sorry.  REALLY limited time right
>> > now.
>>
>> Don't worry, I think I understand your point of view and I'm trying to
>> put it in terms everyone else can follow. At least, I hope that's what
>> I'm doing.
>>
>> Those are pretty good examples of what I'm talking about.
>>
>> If someone implements bad HDMI, then I assume they'll get sued if they
>> even mention the word HDMI. Likewise if a hobbyist documents hacking
>> an HDMI port to connect to a chip inside an adapter that converts it
>> composite video, they'll run into either geo-restrictions or legal
>> trouble, if that adapter fries the HDMI port.
>>
>> In the US people can say whatever they want, but, elsewhere in the
>> world, they'll say 18-pin audio-video port to save their butts. And,
>> again, for good reason because of scam artists exploiting language
>> barriers.
>>
>> BLE they will say custom wifi.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Luke has mentioned that if Intel makes a card the even looks slightly
>> confuse-able for an EOMA68, without being certified then that would be
>> infringement of the certification.
>>
>> I presume HDMI has probably tested this in various courts, because, if
>> a someone implements bad HDMI, they can't just get away with it by
>> calling it something else. So that's another way how certification
>> law, could be stricter than copyright or trademark law. But, I find it
>> hard to believe patents owned by HDMI wouldn't be involved in securing
>> a case like that.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
>> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
>> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk
> _______________________________________________
> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk