[access-uk] Re: Fw: [blind_geek_zone] Fw: [BCT] Some thoughts on FreedomScientific verses Seroteck

Joan,

The majority of us agree with you.
It's that part of common logic and curtisy that big business disregard and their lawyers roll about in the money made from taking people to court.
There's right and wrong, and I vehemently dissagree with Freedom Scientific here. Forget Jaws Vs Window Eyes, or Jaws Vs System Access or Jaws Vs whatever. It's bully boy tactics plain and simple here.
It's about time organisations that keep shoving Jaws down users throats as either being the only choice or being this all mighty perfect solution for anyone that needs speech access to a system quits, looks around them and properly evaluates their clients needs.
FS have turned bad. Not because they're the big boys but because their screenreaders code is buggy and unstable and they're terrified of the competition, IMHO.
I've just had a look at System Access, and it's an incredible piece of software. I'm amazed by it but quite annoyed by the amount of people I know that are using either Jaws, Window Eyes or Hal unnecessarly.
I'd a phone call with someone earlier and I pointed out that it's like Ms Office. how many of us use the bulk, heck a large fraction of it on a daily or even weekly basis? 

How many of us have it though because it's considered the defacto product?
i suspect a high number, this IMHo as soon as I started fiddling with System Access is what it's attempting to re-address the balance.
Email, the net, even office work with it. No drivers, no video chaining needed. I really suspect this could replace a fair number of peoples screenreaders and could be used initially by alot of people.
I suspect FS know this and are terrified and are hitting them where they can. 

System Access even echos back XP's command prompts with no hassle.
I'm not saying it's as powerful as Jaws, Window Eyes or possibly even Hal, (I haven't looked at it in years to be honest). What I am saying is that people are buying or getting bought for them a product that's marketed as the solution when it quite probably is far more than what they need.
Sure we see this with computers that are bought but this doesn't mean it's right. 

Couldn't help that rant...

Dj Paddy

To anyone else that's like me and confused by

Ôà
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joan Muir" <wjmuir.twadugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:31 PM
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Fw: [blind_geek_zone] Fw: [BCT] Some thoughts on FreedomScientific verses Seroteck 



What I can't understand is the need to go to law.
Surely if someone approaches FS by mistake, all that need be done is to point them in the right direction? 

Ok, I'm naive, but I don't see the need for all this legal stuff.

Best wishes,

Joan.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Georgina Joyce" <gena-j@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:03 PM
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Fw: [blind_geek_zone] Fw: [BCT] Some thoughts on FreedomScientific verses Seroteck 



Hi
I can't believe his level of unprofessionalism in urging us to visit wikipedia to read about the law. While I support wikipedia whole heartedly, I would not use it as a legal reference. I don't know about the USA but in Europe there are slight variations. But I guess there's a good chance that they'll succeed as I don't think that they'd undertake the action in the first place. 

He's argument of why now, really doesn't appear to be very solid.
I hope that is a sign that they recognisee that the community are unhappy and our disquiet will affect their business. 

Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

Gena

Amateur Call: M 0 E B P

VOIP / IM: gena1959uk



-----Original Message-----
From: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dj Paddy 
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:00 AM
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 
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
Ôà
----- Original Message ----- 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
verses Seroteck





=======

Visit my webpage and podcast feed at www.blind-geek-zone.net
----- Original Message ----- 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
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
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
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
to
enforce these valuable rights. Freedom Scientific has the legal right,
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
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
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
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
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:

http://www.freelists.org/archives/blind_geek_zone

Visit the website at: www.blind-geek-zone.net



** 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


__________ NOD32 2286 (20070523) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com


** 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


__________ NOD32 2280 (20070521) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com




** 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



** 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: