> While I certainly do appreciate and respect your thoughts on this 
> matter, I just do not believe that there is any credence to the 
> notion that Intel has exclusive ownership of every circular shape 
> ever drawn or of every use of the word "inside" in every possible 
> context.  Furthermore, the U.S. Patent office requires trademark 
> applicants to *disclaim* the use of generic words such as "inside" 
> except as used in the very specific context and implementations 
> in any given design. 
> 
> Furthermore, any trademark holder must be able to *prove* that 
> they are damaged in reputation or financially by the use of any 
> sequence of words or graphical design which they may claim is 
> an infringement on their trademark rights. 

Actually they have to go after the infringement even if they lose to 
prove that they are working to protect the trademark.  Search Slashdot 
and you'll find a story where Intel lawyers went after someone for using 
the phrase Yoga Inside.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/03/30/032251

Whether they win or lose, it still costs to fight it.  Plus, while Intel 
might not have a Trademark on every swooshing circle, the fact that the 
two are exactly the same, including the R (which means Registered 
Trademark) and the angling of the text is an infringement as those 
details would be covered by a trademark.
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss