On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 7:23 PM, Christopher Havel laserhawk64@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't that a little harsh?
considering that ron's response time has consistently been within that timeframe... i didn't initially believe so.
Particularly with respect to the time limit. Suppose he gets bumped by some old lady's jeep and can't respond in time because he's in hospital. Unlikely, but possible.
true. if that turns out to be the case, i have no problem with that. Trademark Law, as best i understand it, *requires* that i be "reasonable"... so... yes, thank you for picking up on that, chris.
Also, I will point out that there are ways for Ron to feck around with you -- calling it a "PCMCIA computer card", for example.
true... however Trademark Law *is* sufficiently flexible to recognise these kinds of tricks. it's... time-consuming to go through the process of *proving* that such... underhanded tricks have been "played"... but if there is a reasonable threat to life (as well as the reputation of a Certification Mark) as caused *by* someone trying to weasle their way out of respecting Copyright Law.... *and* it can be demonstrated that - through messages *right here on this list* that they have indeed tried to copy a concept and are intending to bring it into disrepute in the process.... you get where that's going, i'm sure.
Don't make enemies where you don't have to, Luke. I'm just sayin'.
i am not permitted to think in those terms, chris. i am *REQUIRED* to protect the EOMA68 Certification Mark. friends or enemies does not come into the decision-making process, and could actually be viewed as VIOLATING the obliigations of Trademark Law by not being "Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory" (FRAND).
treating someone as a "friend"... and giving them *special privileges*... that could *definitely* be considered to be a violation of the obligations of a Copyright Holder of a Certification Mark.
sorry... but that's just how it is.
i can't mess about here.
l.