[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::digital

Title:	The Digital way of working

Moderator:	QUARK::LIONELON

Created:	Fri Feb 14 1986
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	5321
Total number of notes:	139771

870.0. "EASINET vs EASYNET" by EUROPE::JORGENSEN () Mon Jul 24 1989 08:39

    If anyone of you who read this topic is connected with the
    Trademarking process in Digital, then I should like to have your
    comments regarding IBM's EASINET (European Academic Supercomputer
    Network). IBM is installing a European-wide network (running TCP/IP
    and SNA) which they are publicly (not just internal working/project
    name) calling EASINET. The back-bone network is completely funded by IBM
    for the next three years. Original line-speed is 64kb, but 2Mb will
    be available (they say) before the end of the three year period.
    The back-bone links 8 - 12 3090-600E vector processors across Europe
    with NSFnet (Cornell University). IBM is also paying for the
    transatlantic. So much for background.
    
    The question is:  Did we trademark/copyright EASYNET ???
    
    Odd Jorgensen

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
870.1	Add Initiative	EUROPE::JORGENSEN		`Mon Jul 24 1989 09:15`	9
	OOPS, missed the I. EASINET = European Academic Supercomputer Initiative Network Sorry, Odd
870.2	EASYNET is not a product	COVERT::COVERT	John R. Covert	`Mon Jul 24 1989 10:21`	1
	Why would we have trademarked something we don't sell?
870.3		BUNYIP::QUODLING	Just a Coupl'a days....	`Mon Jul 24 1989 14:11`	4
	There is also a Cad product sold in Australia, called Easynet. q
870.4	Historical perspective	IAMOK::MCCAULEY	Bob McCauley (DTN 273-5063)	`Mon Jul 24 1989 16:42`	16
	I'm not a lawyer, but here's what I recall about trademarking EASYnet. There are at least two or three companies with products or services named EASYNET. Digital never trademarked the name, primarily because it isn't something we sell, but we also successfully rejected claims from some of these other companies that we were infringing on their trademarks, since we could prove that we had used the name first, dating back to the early 1980s. Corporate Telecommunications worked with the Law Department back in 1985 to determine what our options were. Since other companies had products named EASYNET by that time, it would have been difficult to obtain a trademark, and since we could continue to use it as the name for our internal network, it didn't seem like a major issue. - Bob
870.5	Use it or lose it	SDSVAX::SWEENEY	Honey, I iconified the kids	`Tue Jul 25 1989 20:51`	10
	Under a recent change in United States trademark law, for a trademark to be "valid" (ie defendable against a claim in court), it must be used to identify a real product. I think this all kicks in 1990, when all the trademarks that exist only in their registration papers and not in the marketplace will become available. Too many good names are simply unavailable these days. Fun fact: the first "DECnet" was a network of teletypewriters, and was not a product of Digital.
870.6		HYDRA::ECKERT	Jerry Eckert	`Tue Jul 25 1989 23:21`	7
	re: .5 Under current law a trademark must be in use before trademark rights can be attached. Blue Bell, Inc. v. Farah Mfg. Co. 508 F.2d 1260. The change, which I believe takes place in November of this year, allows an application for exclusive rights to be filed up to six months before the mark is used in interstate commerce.