Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3D14B320.C73002D7@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 18:25:52 +0100
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Trademark infringement: zippo
References: <3D143001 DOT EB2716B2 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <200206221342 DOT g5MDgGb21535 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > I've just been informed that I face litigation if I don't stop using
> > the Zippo trademark.
> 
> I checked the trademark database, there are multiple companies holding
> TMs to "zippo" so it can't be a full-coverage trademark.  As long as
> we don't make lighters we should be OK.
> 
> > (Zippo is a brand of cigarette lighters.)
> 
> I don't think djgpp can be confused with cigarette lighters.

I looked at the (UK parliament's) Trade Mark Act 1994 and most of the sections
deal with infringements in similar categories of goods or services. Zippo
lighters clearly aren't in a similar category to computer software package
managers. But there's also a section (10(3)) about taking unfair advantage of
similar/identical trademarks and usage detrimental to these trademarks. This
is the section that they say I'm infringing.

I don't see how they can prove that using "zippo" as the name of a computer
software package manager takes advantage or their trademark or is detrimental
to their trademark in any way. But I don't want any litigation, so I'd rather
just change the program's name.

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]