2011-08-24 00:00 <wolfspraul> I use trademarks (tm)
2011-08-24 00:00 <wolfspraul> unregistered
2011-08-24 00:00 <wolfspraul> feel super happy about it
2011-08-24 00:00 <wolfspraul> if someone wants to bully me, go ahead. would be the same (even more likely) if it were registered.
2011-08-24 00:01 <wolfspraul> I should have done this from the beginning, would have easily saved me 5000 USD or so.
2011-08-24 00:02 <qi-bot> [commit] Werner Almesberger: logo/corners.fig: some clarifications here as well (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/wernermisc/6f479af
2011-08-24 00:02 <qi-bot> [commit] Werner Almesberger: Merge branch 'master' of projects.qi-hardware.com:wernermisc (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/wernermisc/c340788
2011-08-24 00:03 <wolfspraul> they are building the system of registrations up more and more btw
2011-08-24 00:03 <wolfspraul> no matter how rotten it is, and how companies ignore it in real life
2011-08-24 00:03 <wolfspraul> Madrid protocol, community designs, etc.
2011-08-24 00:03 <wolfspraul> lots of databases can be built
2011-08-24 00:03 <wolfspraul> and every record and modification can be billed
2011-08-24 00:05 <wpwrak> three walls of text posted :)
2011-08-24 00:06 <wpwrak> (everything can be billed) hidden inflation :)
2011-08-24 00:08 <wolfspraul> yeah - walls - done. unregistered trademarks (tm) rule. :-)
2011-08-24 00:11 <wpwrak> trademarks, patents, "community designs" ... the things our lawmakers do for the apples of this world
2011-08-24 00:13 <wpwrak> next: dinner
2011-08-24 00:13 <wolfspraul> enjoy :-)
2011-08-24 00:13 <wolfspraul> how is your flu btw?
2011-08-24 00:14 <wpwrak> slowly retreating. must be one of the bacterial variants. a virus would be gone after just a few days.
2011-08-24 00:30 <rejon> wpwrak, this is cool shit
2011-08-24 00:30 <rejon> didn't you have the SVG of the logo?
2011-08-24 00:30 <rejon> its in the slide deck
2011-08-24 00:30 <rejon> wpwrak, how can i edit this fig?
2011-08-24 00:30 <rejon> i want to get a simple toolchain setup for developers/artists
2011-08-24 00:30 <rejon> with cad and solid modeling btw
2011-08-24 00:30 <rejon> i have a target in mind
2011-08-24 00:32 <wpwrak> rejon: (svg) naw, didn't even search for it (beyond checking if the link on the image led anywhere interesting)
2011-08-24 00:32 <rejon> http://matthope.org
2011-08-24 00:32 <wpwrak> rejon: (edit) with good old xfig :)
2011-08-24 00:32 <rejon> if we can make our toolchain useful for designers, we will be better off
2011-08-24 00:32 <rejon> i can get attention from these inkscape devs and more
2011-08-24 00:33 <rejon> right now people like matt and architects use autocad and some solid modeling tool like solidworks
2011-08-24 00:33 <rejon> anyway, next time wolfspraul and i meet, i want to go over the standard package and some of our basic tools
2011-08-24 00:33 <rejon> we shouldn't just have internal tools for chips, but also for case design, etc
2011-08-24 00:33 <rejon> anyway, just some thoughts
2011-08-24 00:34 <rejon> but is an area we can do 80-85%
2011-08-24 00:34 <rejon> we can get the useful linux devs onto our projects if we phrase as design
2011-08-24 00:34 <rejon> etc
2011-08-24 00:34 <rejon> imo
2011-08-24 00:35 <wpwrak> (tools) yeah, i don't have much good stuff there either. i have a halfway decent if a little cryptic toolchain to go from kicad to pcb (all basically 2D)
2011-08-24 00:35 <wpwrak> for 3D it's either scripts or (once, for the counterweight) heekscad
2011-08-24 00:35 <rejon> can you document it?
2011-08-24 00:36 <wpwrak> eventually :) some parts still need changing
2011-08-24 00:37 <wpwrak> e.g., the tool (sw and hw) for aligning the machine with the board needs revising. the old design was very sub-optimal and the hardware is coming apart these day
2011-08-24 00:37 <wpwrak> s
2011-08-24 00:38 <wpwrak> the underlying magic of going from kicad to a pcb is basically here: http://projects.qi-hardware.com/index.php/p/ben-wpan/source/tree/master/atben/cam/mkmk
2011-08-24 00:38 <wpwrak> plus some makefiles, as usual. and of course the tools that do the actual number crunching
2011-08-24 00:45 <wolfspraul> rejon: nice, people seem to like your Ben logo (the character with circle around it) - see the inclusion in the bootscreen proposed by Andrea Bolognani on the list
2011-08-24 00:51 <wolfspraul> wpwrak: hey, you misunderstand 'registered trademark' in your mail
2011-08-24 00:51 <wolfspraul> if a trademark is not registered, that doesn't mean at all that it can be "ignored or ridiculed"
2011-08-24 00:51 <wolfspraul> you fell for some propaganda of the legal profession
2011-08-24 00:52 <wpwrak> hmm, okay
2011-08-24 00:52 <wolfspraul> trademarks in all major jurisdiction are established and solidified through _USING_ them
2011-08-24 00:52 <wolfspraul> worst case if a case goes to court you need to demonstrate with a poll or so that people think of your product when they hear a certain expression
2011-08-24 00:52 <wolfspraul> the system of 'registrations' was added later to simplify the dispute process
2011-08-24 00:53 <wolfspraul> but it's completely broken (the registrations, not trademarks)
2011-08-24 00:53 <wpwrak> can you license an unregistered trademark ?
2011-08-24 00:53 <wolfspraul> of course
2011-08-24 00:53 <wolfspraul> trademarks are coming from real life, they gain value by use and by how widely they are recognized
2011-08-24 00:53 <wpwrak> okay, then my statements need editing :)
2011-08-24 00:53 <wolfspraul> so for example if a company registers a trademark, but never uses it, it's nearly worthless
2011-08-24 00:53 <wolfspraul> at least that was the old idea
2011-08-24 00:53 <wolfspraul> of course lawyers want to do more and more registrations
2011-08-24 00:54 <wolfspraul> because they can charge fees :-)
2011-08-24 00:54 <wolfspraul> like I said, unregistered trademarks are identified with a little (tm) character
2011-08-24 00:54 <wolfspraul> that's a 'normal' trademark
2011-08-24 00:54 <wolfspraul> a company thinks it's their trademark
2011-08-24 00:54 <wolfspraul> registered trademarks are identified with a (r)
2011-08-24 00:55 <wolfspraul> the system of registrations was built on top of the idea of trademarks, so there are less disputes, or disputes can be settled more effectively
2011-08-24 00:55 <wolfspraul> but it doesn't really work :-)
2011-08-24 00:55 <wolfspraul> because any large company will just take you to court and they will proove there that people think of their product, not yours
2011-08-24 00:56 <wolfspraul> basically a registration sets a legal papertrail proactively
2011-08-24 00:56 <wolfspraul> so you have some starting documents when it goes to court
2011-08-24 00:57 <wolfspraul> a lawyer I know worked on the contract between Ferrari and Ferrero for a while, he said it's a multi-hundred page long thing :-)
2011-08-24 00:57 <wolfspraul> so this is all taken very seriously in Western markets, and increasingly even in China
2011-08-24 00:58 <wolfspraul> so please, NanoNote, Qi, Sharism, Milkymist, are all trademarks
2011-08-24 00:58 <wolfspraul> all/most are unregistered
2011-08-24 00:58 <wolfspraul> so it's NanoNote (tm), not NanoNote (r)
2011-08-24 01:00 <wolfspraul> wpwrak: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark
2011-08-24 01:00 <wolfspraul> no more need for walls
2011-08-24 01:01 <wolfspraul> ok, some excerpt maybe "a trademark may be established through actual use in the marketplace, or through registration of the mark with the trademarks office"
2011-08-24 01:02 <wolfspraul> "In some jurisdictions, trademark rights can be established through either or both means. Certain jurisdictions generally do not recognize trademarks rights arising through use. "
2011-08-24 01:03 <wolfspraul> I could imagine that for example in China (with a very basic legal system anyway), bringing forward a trademark case for an unregistered trademark is completely hopeless, whereas bringing forward a trademark case for a registered trademark will at least create some activity
2011-08-24 01:06 <wpwrak>  hmm, i see. okay, with unregistered trademarks, we still get make rule on their use ? the fine detail would be in the copying. (r) also includes similar. (tm) would be more fuzzy. but maybe that's something we can gloss over.
2011-08-24 01:08 <wolfspraul> of course, if you 'establish' your trademark through 'actual use in the marketplace', then it's still a trademark you own etc.
2011-08-24 01:08 <wolfspraul> you overvalue the registration
2011-08-24 01:08 <wolfspraul> maybe lawyer is your secret second hobby? :-)
2011-08-24 01:08 <wolfspraul> in fact in many jurisdictions you have to protect your trademark otherwise it ceases to exist as a trademark you own
2011-08-24 01:09 <wpwrak> some of the things on that wikipedia article suggest that (r) does give you more power than (tm). beyond merely establishing a paper trail.
2011-08-24 01:09 <wolfspraul> that means you have to setup rules how others can or cannot use it, and you have to enforce those rules (again, depends heavily on jurisdiction)
2011-08-24 01:09 <wpwrak> yup
2011-08-24 01:09 <wolfspraul> certainly a lot of people are working in that direction
2011-08-24 01:09 <wolfspraul> (r) is good for (their) business
2011-08-24 01:10 <wolfspraul> but as I described above it's also a trap. others will just trample over it, which I have seen first hand.
2011-08-24 01:10 <wolfspraul> the lawyers will show up before you, behind you, left and right, and everybody will have an invoice in hand for you.
2011-08-24 01:10 <wolfspraul> so I prefer unregistered trademarks, let's call them original and true trademarks :-)
2011-08-24 01:10 <wolfspraul> (tm)
2011-08-24 01:11 <wolfspraul> established through use in the marketplace
2011-08-24 01:11 <wolfspraul> and hey, we have a fairly efficient domain name system too
2011-08-24 01:11 <wolfspraul> although it is slowly deteriorating with company top level domains for 500k USD etc.
2011-08-24 01:14 <wolfspraul> the marking (tm) and (r) gives you a hint about what was the original way
2011-08-24 01:15 <wpwrak> yeah. so (r) is basically a legal snarl
2011-08-24 01:16 <wolfspraul> well. every profession tries to grow their business :-)
2011-08-24 01:17 <wolfspraul> read the section on "well-known status" for a good laugh
2011-08-24 01:18 <wolfspraul> the underlying ideas of trademarks are good imo. it's about avoiding confusion, product quality.
2011-08-24 01:19 <wolfspraul> companies should use them and protect them, and if there is a dispute take it to court
2011-08-24 01:19 <wpwrak> where all bets are off anyway
2011-08-24 01:19 <wolfspraul> the court process should be individual, not automated. the attempt to automate it just creates hot air for nobodys good.
2011-08-24 01:19 <wolfspraul> seriously you can close all worldwide trademark registration office
2011-08-24 01:20 <wolfspraul> a few thousand people would loose their jobs and could do something more valuable in society
2011-08-24 01:20 <wolfspraul> or maybe even a few ten thousand, who knows
2011-08-24 01:20 <wolfspraul> the trademark system would even become more efficient and better from it
2011-08-24 01:20 <wolfspraul> my opinion
2011-08-24 01:21 <wolfspraul> and we think that the 2000 USD registration fee for a USB vendor ID are bad :-)
2011-08-24 01:22 <wolfspraul> hey, how about a wiki based trademark system
2011-08-24 01:22 <wolfspraul> the power of the people decides who wins
2011-08-24 01:22 <wolfspraul> wikitrademark.org
2011-08-24 01:22 <wolfspraul> all trademarks are registered and described there. word marks, graphical marks, which industry/product type, etc. etc.
2011-08-24 01:22 <wpwrak> yeah. dunno how much of an effective advantage (r) gives you. it's certainly no spell of unvulnerability.
2011-08-24 01:22 <wolfspraul> no totally not
2011-08-24 01:23 <wolfspraul>  /* source inside */ - a true story
2011-08-24 01:23 <wolfspraul> fully registered, for 5+ years
2011-08-24 01:23 <wolfspraul> so?
2011-08-24 01:23 <wolfspraul> Intel doesn't care :-)
2011-08-24 01:23 <wolfspraul> you registered it :-) if you believe this gives you some power, fine. here's what we demand from you now: A) B) C) D)
2011-08-24 01:23 <wolfspraul> you have 3 days
2011-08-24 01:23 <wolfspraul> if you don't, then ... bla bla bla
2011-08-24 01:23 <wpwrak> well, elphel vs. intel is extremely mismatched
2011-08-24 01:24 <wolfspraul> yes but it was a fully registered and used trademark
2011-08-24 01:24 <wpwrak> and it may cost intel a lot to actually win in court (and you, too)
2011-08-24 01:24 <wolfspraul> so what is the value of registration again?
2011-08-24 01:24 <wpwrak> did elphel try to fight back ?
2011-08-24 01:24 <wolfspraul> the registration process has all these levels "opposition phase" etc.
2011-08-24 01:24 <wolfspraul> but it's all hot air
2011-08-24 01:24 <wolfspraul> no of course not
2011-08-24 01:24 <wolfspraul> a 3 person family business
2011-08-24 01:24 <wpwrak> so you don't know. they ran at the first bark.
2011-08-24 01:24 <wolfspraul> they have zero chance
2011-08-24 01:25 <wolfspraul> their mistakes were two:
2011-08-24 01:25 <wpwrak> you don't know. maybe intel would find it more efficient to just buy the registered trademark.
2011-08-24 01:25 <wolfspraul> a) believe in the registration (waste of money, very little actual legal value, of course the lawyers won't tell you)
2011-08-24 01:25 <wolfspraul> b) not see the 'inside' monopolization earlier, they should have just stayed away from it on their own initiative
2011-08-24 01:26 <wpwrak> yes, b) is bad. they took a risk.
2011-08-24 01:26 <wolfspraul> correct. they are from the industry.
2011-08-24 01:26 <wolfspraul> when they registered it, they surely knew "intel inside"
2011-08-24 01:26 <wolfspraul> of course they believed in the registration process
2011-08-24 01:26 <wolfspraul> but it's just a fake process :-)
2011-08-24 01:26 <wolfspraul> it doesn't mean anything
2011-08-24 01:27 <wolfspraul> Intel will not take their dispute to the trademark office, why should they.
2011-08-24 01:27 <wolfspraul> it's a useless paper pushing office
2011-08-24 01:27 <wolfspraul> close it
2011-08-24 01:27 <wolfspraul> no harm, no loss
2011-08-24 01:30 <wolfspraul> the idea of trademarks is not to monopolize words, but to not allow one company to piggypack their business on another company, by confusing consumers about who is who
2011-08-24 01:30 <wolfspraul> disputes are best handled case by case, either directly between businesses, or in court
2011-08-24 01:30 <wolfspraul> so the best way imo is to use trademarks established through actual use in the marketplace, and identified with (tm) when possible
2011-08-24 01:32 <wpwrak> yes, the obvious "correct use" would be fake products. the problem seems to be in the concept of similarity or confusion of the customer being applied way too liberally
2011-08-24 01:35 <wpwrak> fake products in the sense of a wholesale copy of an exiting product or creating a fake product. e.g., an Apple iTV (if that doesn't exist yet)
2011-08-24 01:37 <wolfspraul> to be fair to the big corps, when you introduce a new global product/brand, it is nearly impossible to not step onto some small guy somewhere
2011-08-24 01:37 <wolfspraul> I believe there was a fairly big company using 'iPad' in Japan, for a point-of-sales system or so. Fujitsu? something like that
2011-08-24 01:37 <wolfspraul> but what can Apple do
2011-08-24 01:38 <wolfspraul> a separate name for Japan?
2011-08-24 01:38 <wolfspraul> so they just move forward, and take the heat
2011-08-24 01:38 <wolfspraul> in the case of Fujitsu (or whoever it was), they 'settled' :-)
2011-08-24 01:38 <wolfspraul> out of court of course, in private
2011-08-24 01:39 <wolfspraul> the trademark was registered (in Japan), was in actual use, was backed by a large company
2011-08-24 01:39 <wolfspraul> but in the end it still had to give way, and I think actually it's better for everybody
2011-08-24 01:39 <wolfspraul> imagine the iPad being called jPad in Japan
2011-08-24 01:39 <wolfspraul> not good
2011-08-24 01:40 <wolfspraul> also you can imagine hundreds of smart guys to register iWhatever now in hopes of striking gold one day
2011-08-24 01:40 <wolfspraul> which they won't ;-)
2011-08-24 01:40 <wolfspraul> they will get a nice nastygram though
2011-08-24 01:56 <wpwrak> some may still try. particularly trolls who are lawyers themselves have a bit of an advantage there.
2011-08-24 02:29 <kristianpaul> hum, kcryptd ca be a little cpu eating.. i wonder how it can behave on a theorically encrypted fs on the nanonote :-)
2011-08-24 03:35 <qi-bot> [commit] Xiangfu Liu: pem update to 0.7.9 (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/openwrt-packages/1aac941
2011-08-24 03:35 <qi-bot> [commit] Xiangfu Liu: Merge branch 'master' of projects.qi-hardware.com:openwrt-packages (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/openwrt-packages/77c55db
2011-08-24 03:46 <kristianpaul> hum smart is ok, wonder what hapened to the hardisk last night..
2011-08-24 03:47 <kristianpaul> xiangfu: had you sucefull boot linux on your M1 rihght?
2011-08-24 03:48 <xiangfu> kristianpaul,  yes
2011-08-24 03:48 <kristianpaul> what is you cmdline.txt file?~
2011-08-24 03:48 <kristianpaul> s/what is/how look
2011-08-24 03:48 <xiangfu> new kernel don't needs cmdline.txt
2011-08-24 03:49 <kristianpaul> hum..
2011-08-24 03:49 <xiangfu> kristianpaul, http://www.milkymist.org/wiki/index.php?title=Linux#boot_OpenWrt
2011-08-24 03:49 <kristianpaul> oh
2011-08-24 03:49 <xiangfu> maybe buildin commandline. not check the detail
2011-08-24 03:49 <kristianpaul> okay i'll format my memcard and try again
2011-08-24 03:55 <kristianpaul> hum, i think i'll hardcode that neboot to my home net or end adding a second interface..
2011-08-24 04:16 <kristianpaul> :D
2011-08-24 04:17 <kristianpaul> wtf, why i cant do ls?
2011-08-24 04:18 <kristianpaul> hush: can't execute 'ls': Permission denied
2011-08-24 04:18 <kristianpaul> larsc: ?
2011-08-24 04:28 <kristianpaul> reads about xmodem
2011-08-24 04:33 <kristianpaul> hum, is me or this busybox dont have rx command enable?..
2011-08-24 05:31 <xiangfu> kristianpaul, milkymist or openwrt :D
2011-08-24 05:32 <xiangfu> milkymist or nanonote
2011-08-24 11:11 <kristianpaul> xiangfu, milkymist :)
2011-08-24 11:56 <antoniodariush> antoniodarisuh AKA `antonio`
2011-08-24 12:04 <kilae> hi, is there a page about the future of the ben nanonote?
2011-08-24 12:06 <wolfspraul> the future is now :-)
2011-08-24 12:06 <wolfspraul> what do you mean?
2011-08-24 12:07 <wolfspraul> we collected all sorts of ideas for the hardware, here http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Ya_NanoNote_Specs
2011-08-24 12:07 <wolfspraul> but that's a very loose wishlist, just to check back once in a while
2011-08-24 12:07 <wolfspraul> your feedback is very welcome of course
2011-08-24 12:09 <kilae> thx, I mean milestones or something similar
2011-08-24 12:10 <wolfspraul> it's not very systematic, people work on various things
2011-08-24 12:16 <kilae> okay, and what's the process of a hardware update?
2011-08-24 12:18 <wolfspraul> there is no process, one day a set of features needs to emerge that makes sense
2011-08-24 12:19 <wolfspraul> for example I am currently working on the Milkymist One, and while that took many times longer than expected, it will take longer still :-)
2011-08-24 12:19 <wolfspraul> kilae: what are you trying to do or find out?
2011-08-24 12:20 <wolfspraul> do you have a Ben? are you waiting for the Ya - which features do you think the Ben should have that it doesn't have now?
2011-08-24 12:25 <kilae> no, but I want to find out whether it's worth!
2011-08-24 12:27 <wolfspraul> which one, the Ben NanoNote or something else?
2011-08-24 12:28 <wolfspraul> the Ben NanoNote was introduced in March 2010, and continues to sell and will continue to sell
2011-08-24 12:28 <wolfspraul> it's a great device, imo. of course because I worked so hard on it :-)
2011-08-24 12:28 <wolfspraul> for me I make a new device, say 'successor', when I believe I can make something truly better
2011-08-24 12:32 <kilae> thanks for the infos
2011-08-24 12:33 <wolfspraul> kilae: what do you want to do with the NanoNote?
2011-08-24 12:33 <wolfspraul> and what are you comparing it to?
2011-08-24 12:36 <antoniodariush> ac
2011-08-24 12:37 <kilae> wolfspraul: I have a freerunner and a dingoo, and I want to make a wireless linux device
2011-08-24 12:37 <antoniodariush> sorry ignore that
2011-08-24 12:38 <wolfspraul> freerunner too, wow
2011-08-24 15:25 <kyak> i heard about problems with "g" letter on new Bens. But here i have an opposite problem - the "g" is not sensitive enough on an older Ben
2011-08-24 15:25 <kyak> it wasn't always like this
2011-08-24 15:26 <kyak> i waited several weeks for this problem to disappear, but it wouldn't
2011-08-24 15:26 <kyak> (of course i used Ben during this time)
2011-08-24 15:26 <kyak> it's really annoying, what can i do?
2011-08-24 15:31 <wpwrak_> kyak: maybe put a bit of paper under the G button ?
2011-08-24 15:32 <wpwrak_> that would reduce the distance it has to travel
2011-08-24 15:32 <wpwrak_> but in general it probably means the dome is damaged
2011-08-24 16:07 <kyak> wpwrak_: hm, piece of paper, i'll try that!
2011-08-24 16:07 <kyak> (dome damaged) could be, i'm not very gentle with my electronic devices
2011-08-24 16:45 <rjeffries> interesting: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2011/08/17/could-a-crypto-computer-in-your-pocket-replace-all-passwords/
2011-08-24 18:05 <qi-bot> The build was successfull, see images here: http://fidelio.qi-hardware.com/~xiangfu/compile-log/openwrt-xburst.full_system-08232011-1417/
2011-08-24 21:03 <rjeffries> wpwrak how similar (or not...) is ATmega 128RFA1 to what you designed into ATben and ATusb modules?
2011-08-24 21:03 <rjeffries> http://www.atmel.com/dyn/products/product_parameters.asp?category_id=163&family_id=676&subfamily_id=2124&part_id=4692&ListAllAttributes=1
2011-08-24 21:05 <rjeffries>  huge chart of the 20 different versions of Xbee modules...    http://www.digi.com/pdf/chart_xbee_rf_features.pdf 
2011-08-24 21:06 <rjeffries> tuxbrain fyi Zigduinio does not use an xbee module. It uses the Amtel ATmega128RFA1
2011-08-24 21:08 <wpwrak> the atmega128rfa1 has the same transceiver as atben/atusb. the MCU has four times the flash and 16 times the RAM. lacks USB, though.
2011-08-24 21:09 <wpwrak> if you want to run complex software (such as contiki) inside the MCU, then it's a good choice.
2011-08-24 21:10 <wpwrak> if you need USB and try to keep the firmware lean, then the atmega32u2 is the better choice :)
2011-08-24 21:14 <wpwrak> (xbee) if i rememeber right, most of these are antenna connection variations. if you're not afraid of briefly using a soldering iron, you can have about four such variants per board. (the original design just leaves the antenna connection choice open)