this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
147 points (75.8% liked)

Linux

56064 readers
546 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
nooter692@lemmy.ml
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml
cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
147
The Linux Foundation has become a patent troll (bladerunner.social)
submitted 2 years ago by tux0r@feddit.de to c/linux@lemmy.ml
53 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It seems that the Linux Foundation has decided that both "systemd" and "segmentation fault" (lol?) are trademarked by them.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thesmokingman@programming.dev 109 points 2 years ago (2 children)

“Patent troll” and “required actions to preserve trademarks” are two totally different things. The former is objectively bad in all ways. The second is explainable if there truly is a trademark and said gear infringes on the trademark and may be excusable if the Linux Foundation is forced to act to preserve their branding (trademark law is weird). It’s even more explainable if this is a shitty auto filter some paralegal had to build without any technical review because IP law firms are hot fucking mess. I’m also very curious to see the original graphics which I couldn’t find on Mastodon. If they are completely unrelated and there was an explicit action by someone who knew better, the explanation provides no excuse.

Attacking any company because the trademark process is stupid doesn’t accomplish much more than attacking someone paying taxes for participating in capitalism.

[–] tux0r@feddit.de 39 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Why does the Linux Foundation even have a trademark process for "segmentation fault"? According to the poster on Mastodon, these words were the whole design.

[–] roguetrick@kbin.social 77 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Just like champagne only comes from the champagne region of France, true segmentation fault only comes from a linux program shitting itself.

[–] wmassingham@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago

Everything else is just a sparkling memory error?

[–] bluGill@kbin.social 20 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Linux is the imposter here. Segmentation fault refers to how the PDP-(I forget) hardware organized memory. It comes from the original unix implementation which linux has never had any part of.

[–] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They aren’t satinf they have a trademark on the phrase ‘ segmentation fault’. They are saying the artwork called ‘segmentation fault’ contains a trademarked image/logo/whatever

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What is this segmentation fault logo or image? I’m not familiar with anything like that and searching for it hasn’t helped.

[–] FiskFisk33@lemmy.one 5 points 2 years ago

we don't know, the post does not elaborate

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It doesn’t matter because trademark law is about usage and active protection of rights, not origination.

[–] bluGill@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It does matter because projects like *BSD can prove continuous usage of the term. As such either the trademark is easy to break (it is common use), or it can only be a trademark in very specific contexts that are unlikely to apply.

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

Sure, what I was saying is that whether someone else created it in the 70s isn’t significant for trademark law. If multiple entities have been using it since then without claiming exclusivity would be significant.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sonotsugipaa@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Aged like fine segmentation fault

[–] Synthuir@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

—Lucy Liubot

[–] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Segmentation fault is the name of the artwork.

The artwork itself might contain the Linux logo

[–] QuazarOmega@lemy.lol 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You mean Tux? That's under a custom attribution license, with no noncommercial clause

[–] thesmokingman@programming.dev 13 points 2 years ago

Doing a search on the USPTO shows no mark for that combination of words. Did the poster share the design? Because either there’s more to the story on their side or there’s more to the Linux Foundation side. For example, an overworked paralegal with no concept of what terms to include. Alternatively, someone being an asshole with a SLAPP suit. We need more information.

[–] nan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You can look trademarks up. They don’t.

There is more to the story, even if it’s just some overzealous bot or contracted company.

[–] Zatujit@reddthat.com 1 points 2 years ago

Does the back include Linux logo or smth? Otherwise it makes no sense

[–] vige@lemmy.world 71 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The trademarks owned by the Linux Foundation are listed here: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/trademarks Neither "systemd" or "segmentation fault" are listed. Something smells funky here.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 29 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Can a third party lodge a complaint and claim to be acting on behalf of The Linux Foundation? Maybe someone is trolling here.

[–] moonpiedumplings@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Isn't that what copyright/patent trolls are? People who lodge complaints on the behalf of others, regardless of whether or not the original owner of the intellectual property actually cares, or in some cases, even is legally allowed to do so? If it's the original owner, then it's usually just considered to be protecting property.

[–] wmassingham@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, patent trolling is when you patent a bunch of stuff and make money by suing people instead of actually producing that product.

Filing complaints on behalf of someone you don't legally represent is fraud.

[–] moonpiedumplings@programming.dev 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Well damn, I guess fraud must be a lot more widespread than I thought. Because no one seems to get punished for this behavior. Just recently, Lockpick, a tool for getting Nintendo Switch roms off a physical device, was dmca'd, and the person who filed the complaint admitted to doing so on twitter. They received no punishment.

I think it's likely that this is a similar case.

[–] thesmokingman@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago

Unless the company you’re impersonating does something, nothing will happen. Hosts like Twitch and YouTube don’t care about whether or not a DMCA is fraud because it’s just easier for them to remove the content and delegate resolution to not them. It’s easy to abuse and often is; no one with money cares enough to do anything.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Fraud is a lot more widespread than most people think, across all categories.

[–] Shareni@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Here's a great explanation from silicone valley. .

The best example I know of is Microsoft buying up insanely broad patents that can be marginally related to Linux, getting Suse to say Linux totally infringed on Microsoft's patents in exchange for not getting sued and selling Linux licences to MS, and then harrasing the shit out of every Linux software and hardware manufacturer for over a decade. They stopped when they realised Linux is not going down and that they depend on it for their infrastructure, and that EEE is a better strategy overall. So now they gave away those patents, and Suse is out while Canonical is in.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 51 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

The complaint is not about the terms "systemd" and "segmentation fault." Those are the titles of the affected artworks. Presumably the artworks themselves contain some trademarked property.

Also, this is utterly unrelated to patents.

[–] Spectacle8011@lemmy.comfysnug.space 3 points 2 years ago

I can understand Systemd being trademarked, but does the Linux Foundation own the trademark for Systemd..? Surely not. I'd think Red Hat before I thought Linux Foundation.

[–] Sorchist@kbin.social 33 points 2 years ago (1 children)

this has nothing even remotely to do with patents, fam

but it is indeed bullshit.

the purpose of a "trademark" is to prevent the public from being deceived about what they're purchasing, so you can't sell "Big Macs" on your own because the public might be deceived into thinking they were purchasing a product from McDonalds, which (I assume) has trademarked the use of "Big Mac" for fast food.

I HIGHLY doubt the Linux Foundation owns the trademark for "Segmentation Fault" with respect to random merch, so... yeah 100% bullshit

(The image does also say "Linux IP" in addition to "Linux Trademark" and I wonder what the hell that is supposed to mean, since "IP" covers a multitude of dissimilar things, maybe it's just a vague handwavy assertion they make in order to make a takedown without particularly justifying it?)

[–] ridago@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago

Funny you should use Big Mac as an example, since McDonalds actually lost that trademark in Europe due to some legal dispute with a pub in Ireland or something

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Are we certain this complaint was lodged by the Linux Foundation? Frequently DMCA takedowns happen because someone who is not the original rights holder made the complaint. Even when there's no actual rights being violated. Essentially people taking advantage of automated systems or just people not wanting to deal with possible legal issues, trolling of a different sort.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 21 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ok but redbubble is fucking infamous for selling merch with blatantly stolen artwork and logos.

[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They may act on behalf of others.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Well yes, its a storefront where anyone can sell "their" designs for a cut, the thing is, redbubble has basically no process for making sure that's all happening above board.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm interested to hear your novel theories about how trademarks and patents are related

[–] Eiim@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 years ago

It's called the "US Patent and Trademark Office", so they must be basically the same thing, right‽

[–] pwr22@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 years ago

They can't until their patent is granted for it 😂

[–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's stupid. Can they not just focus on whatever their purpose is?

[–] eatstorming@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

I think the problem is that just like you (and me), they might not know what their purpose is. 😂

[–] Drito@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"Linux" is owned by Linus Torvalds. Can he ask this foundation to change its name ?

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

Yes, but some funding for Linux (some of which goes directly to Torvalds) comes from the Linux Foundation, so why would he?

[–] SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The Linuses (Lini?) just can't stop screwing up this week.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

You either die a hero, or live long enough to become the villain.

[–] gabriele97@lemmy.g97.top 3 points 2 years ago

Well, good for them that are happy with the segmentation fault (?) Every time I see it I start screaming

load more comments
view more: next ›