QNX related domains

[Andrew]

Hello all

When QNX RTP first came out I had planned to create a variety of web sites
providing news and QNX related content to the QNX community.

Unfortunately due to demands on my resources from other projects I have
decided not to build the previously planned QNX sites.

As a result I am now wanting to sell the domains that I bought in
preparation. Available is QNXWORLD.COM QNXNEWS.COM and QNXTODAY.COM.

I am NOT a domain speculator/trader/reseller, I only have a few domains and
these were originally bought with the genuine objective of building sites
around them.

I have no idea of how much I want for them, but I will take any reasonable
offer. Email me at astuart@mira.net

Thanks

Andrew Stuart

!
<(©¿©)>
~-~

[Rennie_Allen2]

As a result I am now wanting to sell the domains that I bought in
preparation. Available is QNXWORLD.COM QNXNEWS.COM and QNXTODAY.COM.

I’m no lawyer, but you may not own qnxnews.com, since “QNX News” has
been the name of the QNX newsletter since the 80’s; in fact, with the
trademarked “QNX” (combined only with plain English words)in the other
domain names you list, you may not own any of them. I would guess that
you would need permission from QSSL to use these domain names (they do
allow QNXStart to be used by a third party, so I’d guess they would most
likely be willing to allow the use of some or all of these domains for
bona-fide QNX community websites). Of course, none of this applies to
hosting in countries that are not signatories to international
copyright/trademark laws.

[Mitchell_Schoenbrun]

I’m no lawyer either, but as far as I know there haven’t
been any decisions relating to whether the use of a domain
name is a violation of trademark laws. A few years ago the
then controlling agency issued some kind of statement that
they would take reasonable steps to enforce trademark rules,
so I think that QSSL would have no trouble getting these
domains returned to them if they wanted them. That’s
assuming they wanted them. I don’t think its been stated
that a domain will be kept out of service simply because a
trademark hold wants it so.

There are no doubt large legal pitfalls in this that have to be
ironed out. What happens when Harry & David’s sets up
www.apples_and_pairs.com and gets sued by Apple computer. Or
better yet, when they go after www.shane_mcintosh.com.

In the mean time, it still seems to be possible to barter in
this curious area of property, so I think he is on legal
ground. Of course the potential value is somewhat
diminished by the potential alternatives, eg.

qnxplanet.com
qnxinfo.com
qnxguru.com
qnxareus.com
webeqnx.com
qnxdomain.com
qnxfriends.com
qnxnot.com
qnxbay.com
qnxconsultants.com
qnxexperts.com

Try adding some underscores, using all singulars and plurals,
rearrange the words, let your imagination run wild and there
will be thousands to choose from.

Previously, Rennie Allen wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

I’m no lawyer, but you may not own qnxnews.com, since “QNX News” has
been the name of the QNX newsletter since the 80’s; in fact, with the
trademarked “QNX” (combined only with plain English words)in the other
domain names you list, you may not own any of them. I would guess that
you would need permission from QSSL to use these domain names (they do
allow QNXStart to be used by a third party, so I’d guess they would most
likely be willing to allow the use of some or all of these domains for
bona-fide QNX community websites). Of course, none of this applies to
hosting in countries that are not signatories to international
copyright/trademark laws.

Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com

[Bill_Caroselli2]

I believe that “Network Solutions” (one of the largest registrars of domain
names - whom I hate, BTW) plainly states that is there are trademark issues
that they need to be dealt with in the courts and not by them.

Of course that has nothing to do with the law, it’s just an indication that
anyone can register anything.

All things considered, I do believe that Rennie is correct and a contest in
court would easily be won by QNX. Also, I don’t think any of us wants
ill-will between our favorite software company and QNX.

In my company name, Q-TPS, the ‘Q’ used to stand for something. I got a
friendly letter from QSSL’s legal department. I decided it wasn’t worth
fighting for. So now it’s just Q-TPS. Just don’t stick it in your ears.
(Did I say that?!)

Bill Caroselli


“Mitchell Schoenbrun” <maschoen@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:Voyager.010709125208.197A@schoenbrun.com…

I’m no lawyer either, but as far as I know there haven’t
been any decisions relating to whether the use of a domain
name is a violation of trademark laws. A few years ago the
then controlling agency issued some kind of statement that
they would take reasonable steps to enforce trademark rules,
so I think that QSSL would have no trouble getting these
domains returned to them if they wanted them. That’s
assuming they wanted them. I don’t think its been stated
that a domain will be kept out of service simply because a
trademark hold wants it so.

There are no doubt large legal pitfalls in this that have to be
ironed out. What happens when Harry & David’s sets up
www.apples_and_pairs.com and gets sued by Apple computer. Or
better yet, when they go after www.shane_mcintosh.com.

In the mean time, it still seems to be possible to barter in
this curious area of property, so I think he is on legal
ground. Of course the potential value is somewhat
diminished by the potential alternatives, eg.

qnxplanet.com
qnxinfo.com
qnxguru.com
qnxareus.com
webeqnx.com
qnxdomain.com
qnxfriends.com
qnxnot.com
qnxbay.com
qnxconsultants.com
qnxexperts.com

Try adding some underscores, using all singulars and plurals,
rearrange the words, let your imagination run wild and there
will be thousands to choose from.

Previously, Rennie Allen wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

I’m no lawyer, but you may not own qnxnews.com, since “QNX News” has
been the name of the QNX newsletter since the 80’s; in fact, with the
trademarked “QNX” (combined only with plain English words)in the other
domain names you list, you may not own any of them. I would guess that
you would need permission from QSSL to use these domain names (they do
allow QNXStart to be used by a third party, so I’d guess they would most
likely be willing to allow the use of some or all of these domains for
bona-fide QNX community websites). Of course, none of this applies to
hosting in countries that are not signatories to international
copyright/trademark laws.

Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- > maschoen@pobox.com

[Mitchell_Schoenbrun]

Previously, Bill Caroselli @ Q-TPS wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

I believe that “Network Solutions” (one of the largest registrars of domain
names - whom I hate, BTW) plainly states that is there are trademark issues
that they need to be dealt with in the courts and not by them.

What I recall them saying was that if someone owned a domain
such as www.cocacola.com, and the Coca Cola company wanted
it, that it would be turned over without payment. I agree
that they would not want to be involved with the Apple
disputes that I described.

Of course that has nothing to do with the law, it’s just an indication that
anyone can register anything.

Well I may be wrong about this. Its not clear that courts would be
a reasonable place to deal with this anyway. For example, if I was
the registered owner of www.cocacola.com, and I simply pointed it
to a blank html page, it is unclear that I am in anyway infringing on
their trademark. Under what theory of law do you think I could
be forced to turn over the domain?

All things considered, I do believe that Rennie is correct and a contest in
court would easily be won by QNX. Also, I don’t think any of us wants
ill-will between our favorite software company and QNX.

While I agree that no one would want the ill-will, I think
the issue with QSSL is not clear. Trademark law is not
simple, but one of the guiding principles is whether any
alledged infringement is realistically confusing to the
customer. Do you think that QSSL could infer this from any
domain with the letters QNX in it, for exampe:

www.i_program_in_qnx.com
www.i_like_qnx.com
www.qnx_is_good.com
www.i_think_qnx_sucks.com

In my company name, Q-TPS, the ‘Q’ used to stand for something. I got a
friendly letter from QSSL’s legal department. I decided it wasn’t worth
fighting for. So now it’s just Q-TPS. Just don’t stick it in your ears.

Well I think if the ‘Q’ stood for “QNX” then they have a
pretty good infringement case. I think that it is
reasonable to assume that if you adverstized yourself in
this way that a consumer might mistake you for being part of
the QNX company. “QNX” being a clearly made up name has the
additional advantage of being a form of “strong” trademark.

Keep in mind here my central point which is that ownership
of a domain name does not by itself infringe on trademark.
This opened up the market for name grabbing and reselling,
which is why “Network Solutions” changed the rules. Of
course you may disagree with this.

Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com

[Tony_Mantler]

Previously, Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
[…]

There are no doubt large legal pitfalls in this that have to be
ironed out. What happens when Harry & David’s sets up
www.apples_and_pairs.com and gets sued by Apple computer. Or
better yet, when they go after www.shane_mcintosh.com.
[…]

In theory, nothing would happen. Trademarks are only valid in markets you deliver products in, and nobody calling themselves ‘Apple’ makes computers except Apple Computer.

For example, I seem to recall Apple Records (Recording label for a few backwater bands like the Beatles) tried to sue Apple Computer over their name, and lost. Long story short, that’s why there’s a beep sound called ‘sosumi’ in MacOS.

There’s plenty of examples all over the place of different people/companies using identical names in different market segments without conflict.

Of course, you can rest assured that if Apple starts selling an edible fruit, and calls it a “Macintosh”, they’ll have to answer to some lawyers.


Cheers - Tony ‘Nicoya’ Mantler

–
Tony Mantler | Proud ---- Days since the last
QNX Consulting | of our | 27 |
tony@astra.mb.ca | Record ---- “Gerbil Incident”

[Mitchell_Schoenbrun]

Previously, Tony Mantler wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

In theory, nothing would happen. Trademarks are only valid
in markets you deliver products in, and nobody calling
themselves ‘Apple’ makes computers except Apple Computer.

Thanks. That’s pretty much the point I was trying to make.

For example, I seem to recall Apple Records (Recording
label for a few backwater bands like the Beatles) tried to
sue Apple Computer over their name, and lost. Long story
short, that’s why there’s a beep sound called ‘sosumi’ in
MacOS.

My recollection of this episode is different. Apple Records
lost if you mean that Apple Computer was allowed to keep the
“Apple” name. This is not a surprise as using a common every
day fruit is your name is probably a classic “weak” trademark.
On the other hand, they did extract some kind of agreement
to not sell music or music based products. This came back
to haunt them, although I don’t know what the resolution was.

There’s plenty of examples all over the place of different
people/companies using identical names in different market
segments without conflict.

True. And if you pick a weak trademark you should expect this,
unless there is an obvious conflict. Even QSSL never heard from
Quantum Hard drives when Quantum was their name, though they
are both in the “computer” biz. On the other hand, if you make
up your own name, eg. Lucent, Amway, Inktomy, you can beat up
anyone using it.

Of course, you can rest assured that if Apple starts
selling an edible fruit, and calls it a “Macintosh”, they’ll
have to answer to some lawyers.

Why, do you think anyone owns this as a trademark? Not
likely. Not all names are fair game as trademarks. Remember
when Xeroz put all that money into convincing you that you
were not “xeroxing” a document, but instead you were
“copying” it? Kleenex is probably still nervous.

Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com

[Tony_Mantler]

Previously, Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

Previously, Tony Mantler wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
[…]
Of course, you can rest assured that if Apple starts
selling an edible fruit, and calls it a “Macintosh”, they’ll
have to answer to some lawyers.

Why, do you think anyone owns this as a trademark? Not
likely. Not all names are fair game as trademarks. Remember
when Xeroz put all that money into convincing you that you
were not “xeroxing” a document, but instead you were
“copying” it? Kleenex is probably still nervous.

A lot of fruit and vegetable variety names are trademarked by various entities, usually with the goal of providing a set of standards that the product has to live up to, which can then be recognised by the consumer under that trademark.

People still understand that a ‘McIntosh’ or a ‘Granny Smith’ is a subset of the common named ‘Apple’ fruit, and that neither term represents all apple-type fruits. In the same way, people know that ‘Vidalia’ refers not to all onions, but only one specific type of onion, grown in a particular region.

As such, they’re still strong trademarks.


Cheers - Tony ‘Nicoya’ Mantler

–
Tony Mantler | Proud ---- Days since the last
QNX Consulting | of our | 27 |
tony@astra.mb.ca | Record ---- “Gerbil Incident”

[Mitchell_Schoenbrun]

People still understand that a ‘McIntosh’ or a ‘Granny
Smith’ is a subset of the common named ‘Apple’ fruit, and
that neither term represents all apple-type fruits. In the
same way, people know that ‘Vidalia’ refers not to all
onions, but only one specific type of onion, grown in a
particular region.

As such, they’re still strong trademarks.

To be a trademark, the term must be used and owned (really
registered) by a specific entity/person/company. Who are
you proposing owns McIntosh or Granny Smith. Were either of
these strong, then it would not be possible to use them
outside the apple/fruit industry. Try this with Inktomy. If
you try to sell Inktomy apples, or call yourself “Inktomy
Plumbing” you will lose.

BTW: this link might help indicate how McIntosh became
assocated with apples, and why it is now common terminology.
I don’t know if the story is true.

http://www.rockymountainfruit.com/mcintosh.htm


Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com

[David_Gibbs1]

Mitchell Schoenbrun <maschoen@pobox.com> wrote:

Even QSSL never heard from
Quantum Hard drives when Quantum was their name, though they
are both in the “computer” biz.

True, but we did occaionally – especially in technical support –
hear from the customers. It made for some very confusing conversations…

C: Hello, I can’t read my hard drive
S: Are you running Fsys?
C: F what?
S: Fsys, the file system manager?
C: Hunh?
S: …

-David

QNX Training Services
dagibbs@qnx.com

[Miguel_Simon1]

David…

You have been at QSSL for a while, have you?

Regards…

Miguel.


David Gibbs wrote:

Mitchell Schoenbrun <> maschoen@pobox.com> > wrote:

Even QSSL never heard from
Quantum Hard drives when Quantum was their name, though they
are both in the “computer” biz.

True, but we did occaionally – especially in technical support –
hear from the customers. It made for some very confusing conversations…

C: Hello, I can’t read my hard drive
S: Are you running Fsys?
C: F what?
S: Fsys, the file system manager?
C: Hunh?
S: …

-David

QNX Training Services
dagibbs@qnx.com

–

my opinions are mine, only mine, solely mine, and they are not related
in any possible way to the institution(s) in which I study and work.

Miguel Simon
Research Engineer
School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
University of Oklahoma
http://www.amerobotics.ou.edu/
http://www.saic.com

[Tony_Mantler]

Previously, Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

People still understand that a ‘McIntosh’ or a ‘Granny
Smith’ is a subset of the common named ‘Apple’ fruit, and
that neither term represents all apple-type fruits. In the
same way, people know that ‘Vidalia’ refers not to all
onions, but only one specific type of onion, grown in a
particular region.

As such, they’re still strong trademarks.

To be a trademark, the term must be used and owned (really
registered) by a specific entity/person/company. Who are
you proposing owns McIntosh or Granny Smith.

I don’t know specifically who would own those two names, but generally they’re owned by growers co-ops, food companies, and the like.

Were either of
these strong, then it would not be possible to use them
outside the apple/fruit industry. Try this with Inktomy. If
you try to sell Inktomy apples, or call yourself “Inktomy
Plumbing” you will lose.

Trademarks are only ever valid in markets you do business in. Period. If you don’t do business in a certain location, you don’t have a trademark there. If you don’t do business in a certain type of product, you don’t have a trademark there.

There is no ‘universal trademark’ where you get exclusive rights to a name in every location and in every product type, unless you happen to also produce products in every location and every product type, and that’s pretty rare these days.

BTW: this link might help indicate how McIntosh became
assocated with apples, and why it is now common terminology.
I don’t know if the story is true.

http://www.rockymountainfruit.com/mcintosh.htm

Certainly a cute story.


Cheers - Tony ‘Nicoya’ Mantler

–
Tony Mantler | Proud ---- Days since the last
QNX Consulting | of our | 23 |
tony@astra.mb.ca | Record ---- “Gerbil Incident”

[David_Gibbs1]

Miguel Simon <simon@ou.edu> wrote:

David…

You have been at QSSL for a while, have you? >

9 years, now. Yup, a while.

-David

QNX Training Services
dagibbs@qnx.com

[Mitchell_Schoenbrun]

Previously, Tony Mantler wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

Trademarks are only ever valid in markets you do business
in. Period. If you don’t do business in a certain location,
you don’t have a trademark there. If you don’t do business
in a certain type of product, you don’t have a trademark
there.

There is no ‘universal trademark’ where you get exclusive
rights to a name in every location and in every product
type, unless you happen to also produce products in every
location and every product type, and that’s pretty rare
these days.

Well you’re hitting the limit of my legal knowledge, and I’m not
going to pretend to know any more than I do, but I think
that you are wrong on this. Certainly you are correct when
it comes to weak trademarks. Why don’t you respond to my
“Inktomy” example. Do you think that you can setup shop as
“Inktomy Fruits” at a roadside stand and get away with it?

Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com

[Tony_Mantler]

Previously, Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

Previously, Tony Mantler wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

Trademarks are only ever valid in markets you do business
in. Period. If you don’t do business in a certain location,
you don’t have a trademark there. If you don’t do business
in a certain type of product, you don’t have a trademark
there.

There is no ‘universal trademark’ where you get exclusive
rights to a name in every location and in every product
type, unless you happen to also produce products in every
location and every product type, and that’s pretty rare
these days.

Well you’re hitting the limit of my legal knowledge, and I’m not
going to pretend to know any more than I do, but I think
that you are wrong on this. Certainly you are correct when
it comes to weak trademarks. Why don’t you respond to my
“Inktomy” example. Do you think that you can setup shop as
“Inktomy Fruits” at a roadside stand and get away with it?

Because I have no idea who Inktomy is, or what Inktomy does? I just did a bit of web searching, and the only things that popped up were a few broken links to what apparently is now a dead search engine.

Assuming that’s all they are/were, I doubt anyone would have trouble using ‘Inktomy Fruits’, ‘Inktomy Marine Diesels’, ‘Inktomy Mining & Smelting’, ‘Inktomy Coffee house and Bookstore’, whatever.

Heck, just look at Astra. We’re Astra Network, QNX Consultants, and just across town is Astra Credit Union, and I’m sure there’s a zillion other Astra trademarks around the world, none of whom in any way dilute our brand name.

Mind you, if some other programming shop wants to come along and call themselves Astra, we’re gonna kick their ass, but that’s another story.


Cheers - Tony ‘Nicoya’ Mantler

–
Tony Mantler | Proud ---- Days since the last
QNX Consulting | of our | 24 |
tony@astra.mb.ca | Record ---- “Gerbil Incident”

[Stephen_Munnings]

In article <Voyager.010713091656.28912I@neptune.astra>, tony@astra.mb.ca
says…

Previously, Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
Previously, Tony Mantler wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

Trademarks are only ever valid in markets you do business
in. Period. If you don’t do business in a certain location,
you don’t have a trademark there. If you don’t do business
in a certain type of product, you don’t have a trademark
there.

There is no ‘universal trademark’ where you get exclusive
rights to a name in every location and in every product
type, unless you happen to also produce products in every
location and every product type, and that’s pretty rare
these days.

Well you’re hitting the limit of my legal knowledge, and I’m not
going to pretend to know any more than I do, but I think
that you are wrong on this. Certainly you are correct when
it comes to weak trademarks. Why don’t you respond to my
“Inktomy” example. Do you think that you can setup shop as
“Inktomy Fruits” at a roadside stand and get away with it?

Because I have no idea who Inktomy is, or what Inktomy does? I just did a bit of web searching, and the only things that popped up were a few broken links to what apparently is now a dead search engine.

I think that is because the actual name is Inktome!



Assuming that’s all they are/were, I doubt anyone would have trouble using ‘Inktomy Fruits’, ‘Inktomy Marine Diesels’, ‘Inktomy Mining & Smelting’, ‘Inktomy Coffee house and Bookstore’, whatever.

Heck, just look at Astra. We’re Astra Network, QNX Consultants, and just across town is Astra Credit Union, and I’m sure there’s a zillion other Astra trademarks around the world, none of whom in any way dilute our brand name.

Mind you, if some other programming shop wants to come along and call themselves Astra, we’re gonna kick their ass, but that’s another story. >


Cheers - Tony ‘Nicoya’ Mantler >

–
Tony Mantler | Proud ---- Days since the last
QNX Consulting | of our | 24 |
tony@astra.mb.ca > | Record ---- “Gerbil Incident”
\

–
Stephen Munnings
Software Developer
Corman Technologies Inc.

[Rennie_Allen2]

Mind you, if some other programming shop wants to come along and call
themselves Astra, we’re gonna kick their ass, but that’s another story.

I wouldn’t be surprised if there currently is another Astra programming
shop somewhere, but are they in a market area that you operate in ?
This becomes an interesting question now, with advent of the internet as
a commercial vehicle, since I can see your advertisements on my computer
here in California, and others can see them in Germany and Malaysia
(does that mean you operate in the California, German and Malaysian
market areas ?). If you are operating in these areas, then you (or the
other Astra/s) should be aggressively pursuing trademark infringement,
otherwise the trademark is diluted to a common term.

[Stephen_Munnings]

In article <MPG.15b8d9b8150e7143989697@inn.qnx.com>, steve@cormantech.com
says…

In article <> Voyager.010713091656.28912I@neptune.astra> >, > tony@astra.mb.ca
says…
Previously, Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
Previously, Tony Mantler wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

Trademarks are only ever valid in markets you do business
in. Period. If you don’t do business in a certain location,
you don’t have a trademark there. If you don’t do business
in a certain type of product, you don’t have a trademark
there.

There is no ‘universal trademark’ where you get exclusive
rights to a name in every location and in every product
type, unless you happen to also produce products in every
location and every product type, and that’s pretty rare
these days.

Well you’re hitting the limit of my legal knowledge, and I’m not
going to pretend to know any more than I do, but I think
that you are wrong on this. Certainly you are correct when
it comes to weak trademarks. Why don’t you respond to my
“Inktomy” example. Do you think that you can setup shop as
“Inktomy Fruits” at a roadside stand and get away with it?

Because I have no idea who Inktomy is, or what Inktomy does? I just did a bit of web searching, and the only things that popped up were a few broken links to what apparently is now a dead search engine.

I think that is because the actual name is Inktome!

Or, just maybe Inktomi (both companies exist)

Assuming that’s all they are/were, I doubt anyone would have trouble using ‘Inktomy Fruits’, ‘Inktomy Marine Diesels’, ‘Inktomy Mining & Smelting’, ‘Inktomy Coffee house and Bookstore’, whatever.

Heck, just look at Astra. We’re Astra Network, QNX Consultants, and just across town is Astra Credit Union, and I’m sure there’s a zillion other Astra trademarks around the world, none of whom in any way dilute our brand name.

Mind you, if some other programming shop wants to come along and call themselves Astra, we’re gonna kick their ass, but that’s another story. >


Cheers - Tony ‘Nicoya’ Mantler >

–
Tony Mantler | Proud ---- Days since the last
QNX Consulting | of our | 24 |
tony@astra.mb.ca > | Record ---- “Gerbil Incident”


\

–
Stephen Munnings
Software Developer
Corman Technologies Inc.

[Mitchell_Schoenbrun]

Previously, Stephen Munnings wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

I think that is because the actual name is Inktome!

Thanks, I’m a very bad speller.


Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com

[Mitchell_Schoenbrun]

Previously, Rennie Allen wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:

If you are operating in these areas, then you (or the
other Astra/s) should be aggressively pursuing trademark infringement,
otherwise the trademark is diluted to a common term.

Another excellent point. To maintain your trademark you not
only have to take steps to make sure it doesn’t become part
of the lexicon, you also have to defend it against
infringement.

Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com