[access-uk] Re: Fw: [blind_geek_zone] Fw: [BCT] Some thoughts on FreedomScientific verses Seroteck
- From: "Steve Nutt" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 06:48:04 +0100
Hi Barry,
Course, he hasn't addressed the fact that Freedombox was there first, in
1998, and Freedom Scientific got the name in 2001. At one time, =
Jonathan
used to be objective, but he is losing credibility by the day in my =
view.
All the best
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf =
Of
Dj Paddy
Sent: 23 May 2007 03:00
To: bcab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [access-uk] Fw: [blind_geek_zone] Fw: [BCT] Some thoughts on
FreedomScientific verses Seroteck
I really had respect for Jonothon, untill i read this.
However, it seems he's been blinded by the almighty dollar and the =
Corporate
life.
It's sickening that he's trying to write by pleading the role of the =
humble=20
journalist, whilst admitting his position within the company.
I feel Freedom Scientific regardless of the out come have dealt =
themselves a
blow in the eyes of their customers and potential customers.
Dj Paddy
=D4=E0=06
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Rick Harmon" <rickharmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind_geek_zone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:31 AM
Subject: [blind_geek_zone] Fw: [BCT] Some thoughts on FreedomScientific=20
verses Seroteck
>
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> Visit my webpage and podcast feed at www.blind-geek-zone.net
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----=20
> From: "Larry Gassman" <lgsinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Blind Cool Tech" <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:36 PM
> Subject: [BCT] Some thoughts on FreedomScientific verses Seroteck
>
>
>
>>>Jonathan Mosen wrote the following on his Exploders list.
>>
>>Larry
>>
>>
>>>Last week, Freedom Scientific, Inc. filed suit against Serotek=20
>>>Corporation
>>>for trademark infringement with respect to the FreedomBox range of
>>>products.
>>>Since then, the matter has been discussed at length on some
>>>blindness-related blogs and e-mail lists. I'd like by way of this =
message
>>>to
>>>clarify what I view as some of the objectives of the suit. I am a =
Vice
>>>President at Freedom Scientific, and am extremely proud to work =
there.
>>>However writing this message is my own initiative as a former =
technology
>>>journalist. My aim in doing this is that people at least get a chance =
to
>>>consider facts over rhetoric.
>>>
>>>Firstly, let me talk a little about trademark law. A trademark's =
purpose
>>>is
>>>to exclusively identify a source and origin of products. Importantly, =
a
>>>trademark only applies to a certain range of goods or services. One =
of=20
>>>the
>>>questions I have seen on e-mail lists is, "how can Freedom Scientific
>>>claim
>>>to own the word Freedom." By taking this action, Freedom Scientific =
is=20
>>>not
>>>seeking to do this. Rather, Freedom Scientific is simply enforcing =
the
>>>Freedom Scientific trademark, which it owns for certain goods. =
Freedom
>>>Scientific has invested to establish its trademarks and is only =
seeking=20
>>>to
>>>enforce these valuable rights. Freedom Scientific has the legal =
right,=20
>>>and
>>>the obligation to its customers and shareholders, to protect the use =
of
>>>its
>>>trademark in the context of assistive technology. The concept of =
using
>>>common words in trademarks is common - for example the use of the =
word
>>>Apple
>>>to describe a computer company. As is well known through recent news
>>>stories, Apple is quite entitled to own this name in the context of
>>>computer
>>>hardware and software products. It does not, of course, mean that =
Apple
>>>has
>>>any rights to the name when you eat a piece of fruit. Trademarks can
>>>co-exist where there is no similarity between the businesses. For=20
>>>example,
>>>Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets are trademarks, but there is no =
issue
>>>there
>>>because the businesses' purposes are totally different and there is =
no
>>>room
>>>for confusion. Freedom Scientific is confident that its trademark =
rights
>>>will be upheld. The broadening of scope of the FreedomBox products to
>>>include products like FreedomBox System Access (FBSA) offering access =
to
>>>mainstream applications only exacerbates the infringement.
>>>
>>>Trademarks are not some abstract thing. They are a company's =
reputation.
>>>They are legal property, and you can't simply take someone's property
>>>without their consent.
>>>
>>>Secondly, I'd like to turn to the question, "why now." All sorts of
>>>bizarre
>>>speculation have been put forward as to the timing of this suit. =
Freedom
>>>Scientific made Serotek well aware of its position on this matter, =
but
>>>unfortunately Serotek was unwilling to negotiate a settlement to this
>>>matter. No one likes having to go to court, but if you genuinely =
believe
>>>your property rights are being trampled upon, in the end there is no
>>>choice
>>>but to do so if you are unable to get a resolution any other way.
>>>
>>>Thirdly, it has been said that Freedom Scientific is giving the blind
>>>community no credit by taking this action, and that everyone knows =
the
>>>difference between the two product lines. Rest assured, this is most
>>>certainly not the case. I can tell you that Freedom Scientific has =
been
>>>contacted by Serotek customers seeking technical support, or even =
wanting
>>>to
>>>buy a Serotek product. Thus, there is a likelihood of confusion.
>>>
>>>Fourthly, a petition has been established by the hosts of ACB Radio's =
>>>Main
>>>Menu, calling itself the Save Serotek petition. The grossly =
misleading
>>>name
>>>of this petition implies that somehow Freedom Scientific's objective =
is=20
>>>to
>>>put Serotek out of business. As a result of the sensationalist name, =
many
>>>commenters to the Petition have made comments to this effect. All =
Freedom
>>>Scientific is seeking to do is protect its property and to seek
>>>appropriate
>>>compensation for the unlawful use of it.
>>>
>>>The objective here is not to put Serotek out of business. 2007 has=20
>>>already
>>>seen great innovation from Freedom Scientific and there's plenty more =
to
>>>come. Honest competition inspires excellence and is good news for the
>>>customer. But I stress the word "honest." Yes, many people in =
assistive
>>>technology are motivated by a strong sense of purpose and commitment =
to
>>>making a difference. But these companies are still commercial =
entities,
>>>who
>>>have every right to use the legal system to protect their property if =
>>>they
>>>think they need to, just as you have a right to use the legal system =
if
>>>someone breaks into your house and takes something belonging to you
>>>
>>>In closing, I hope that those genuinely interested in the facts of =
this
>>>matter will take the time to read up on trademark case law, but most
>>>importantly, will let the judicial process take its course. It occurs =
to
>>>me
>>>that if Freedom Scientific has got it as wrong as a few people claim, =
>>>then
>>>what do they have to fear? A jury will dismiss the case. I doubt that =
>>>will
>>>happen though. If the law has been broken as I believe it has, then
>>>Freedom
>>>Scientific is quite entitled to redress.
>>>
>>>My hope is that sanity prevails and that Serotek has both the courage =
and
>>>the decency to brand its products in a fashion that wasn't already =
being
>>>used in this industry. I think they would gain a lot of respect from =
the
>>>blind community for acting honourably. Fair competition is not too =
much=20
>>>to
>>>ask for, and it most certainly is worth fighting for.
>>>
>>>Those interested in the subject of trademarks may like to take a look =
at
>>>the
>>>Wikipedia entry on the subject, found at:
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark.
>>>
>>>Jonathan Mosen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BlindCoolTech mailing list
> To send a message to the list, send it to:
> BlindCoolTech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from the list or to make changes to your list settings =
or
> view the list archives, click on the following link:
> =
http://lists.luv2bablyndi.net/listinfo.cgi/blindcooltech-luv2bablyndi.net=
>
> To post a message, send your posts to:
>
> blind_geek_zone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To unsubscribe, send message to:
>
> blind_geek_zone-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> put unsubscribe in the subject line.
>
> Archived messages can be found at:
>
> //www.freelists.org/archives/blind_geek_zone
>
> Visit the website at: www.blind-geek-zone.net
>=20
** To leave the list, click on the immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Dunsubscribe]
** If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** and in the Subject line type
** unsubscribe
** For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
** immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Dfaq]
** or send a message, to
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the Subject:- faq
** To leave the list, click on the immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe]
** If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** and in the Subject line type
** unsubscribe
** For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
** immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq]
** or send a message, to
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the Subject:- faq
Other related posts:
