Skip to main content

Linux trademark in Australia

The long and the short of this is: if Linus does not pick up and realistically use the Linux trademark in Australia, we will one day face another situation in which a private entity wishes to control the name “Linux” here, or perhaps someone’s stupid enough to think that they can succeed where The SCO Group is failing embarassingly badly at being a troll under the bridge.

The LinuxMark organisation was formed specifically to pursue recognition of Linus’ title to the name “Linux” worldwide, and in Australia, naturally enough, turned to Linux Australia for the actual execution of the plan.

LA in turn assigned Open Source author and legal advocate Jeremy “Spammer Slammer” Malcolm to the case.

So far, so good.

Now comes this bunch of turkeys from SlashDot mailing LA’s Press people to accuse Jeremy of being a money-grubbing Microserf, Scientology lackey and Lord knows what else, and to demand an accounting from LA for their part in this nefarious plot.

I quote, with great relish, from Ground Hog Day:

“Hello? Morons? Your bus is leaving!”

Get an act! Goodness me, it’s pretty obvious that literacy standards have been impacted by this new “negative information” science — y’all not only can’t read, y’all don’t read even the most basic FAQts before setting out on your own jihad/crusade to rid the world of injustice.

What y’all ought to be doing is putting a trademark™ (™) symbol (or in countries where it’s already fully registerd, a registered symbol® (®)) and a link to an explanatory page like this one. up next to the word “linux” on every website you own.

The only thing is — given the intelligence displayed so far — I’m getting less and less certain that this is a good idea after all.

And a word to journalists: when the Revolution comes and I finally get to make some laws, one of them is going to involve terms like “criminal negligence” and “inciting to riot” in connection with publishing gossip as if it were fact.

Yes, sensation does get you hits. And so? What about your own personal, moral responsibilities? Do you want “journalist” to rank alongside (or below) “lawyer” in people’s estimation? Do you want to have to lie about what you do in order to be socially accepted? Think before you act.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

new life for an old (FTX) PSU, improved life for one human

the LEDs on this 5m strip happen to emit light centred on a red that does unexpectedly helpful things to (and surprisingly deeply within) a human routinely exposed to it. it has been soldered to a Molex connector, plugged into a TFX power supply from a (retired: the MoBo is cactus) Small Form Factor PC, the assorted PSU connectors (and loose end from the strip) have been taped over. the LED strip cost $10.24 including postage, the rest cost $0, the PSU is running at 12½% of capacity, consumes less power than a laptop plug-pack despite running a fan. trial runs begin today.

every-application-is-part-of-a-toolkit at work

I have a LibreOffice Impress slideshow that I wish to turn into a narrated video. 1. export the slideshow as PNG images (if that is partially broken — as at now — at higher resolutions, Export Directly as PDF then use ‘pdftoppm’ (from the poppler-utils package) to do the same). 2. write a small C program (63 lines including comments) to display those images one at a time, writing a config file entry for Imagination (default transition: ‘cross fade’) based on when the image-viewer application (‘display,’ from the GraphicsMagick suite) is closed on each one; run that, read each image aloud, then close each image in turn. 3. run ‘Imagination’ over the config file to produce a silent MP4 video with the correct timings. 4. run ‘Audacity’ to record speech while using ‘SMPlayer’ to display the silent video, then export that recording as a WAV file. 4a. optionally, use ‘TiMIDIty’ to convert a non-copyright-encumbered MIDI tune to WAV, then import that and blend it with the speech (as a quiet b...

boundaries

pushing the actual boundaries of the physical (not extremes, the boundaries themselves) can often remove barriers not otherwise perceived. one can then often resolve an issue itself, rather than merely stonewalling at the physical consequences of the issue.