[OSM-talk] Recent edits in the wiki / Trademark issue

[Christopher Woods (IWD)]

On 02/02/2013 21:01, Aun Yngve Johnsen wrote:
> This discussion is way out of hand. You guys screaming for publishing the C+D, didn't you see the answer from SimonPoole? They have asked lawyers about advise in publishing it, as well as releasing more information about it. It is not a sign of weak leadership to ask for legal advise in a case that can be as hairy as trademark and copyright issues.
I'm extremely interested to see what in the notice specifies that the TM 
holder believes that they can pursue and control usage when mentioned in 
proximity of Google services. It's such a risible request. That's what 
makes this delay so frustrating for the community as a whole!

Those of us in favour of publication are hardly 'screaming' for it. 
(This includes all the 'armchair lawyers' and some of us who have some 
real world experience dealing with the wonderful world of US and 
Community TMs including disputing, filing and applying for invalidity). 
Community members are requesting it as it impacts upon work they do, 
there's no real reason to withhold the text of the notice. OSMF has no 
real requirement to seek legal guidance prior to first publication, this 
can be sought after initial acknowledgment of receipt, tailoring their 
action accordingly.

Redacting or editing directly as a result of simply receiving a C&D is 
not an ideal first step. Does OSM consider itself to be in breach of 
something discussed in the C&D or that it has actually done something 
wrong? I unequivocally believe the opposite to be true - and that 
Geocode Inc. is misrepresenting the situation.

> Not that I support trademarking dictionary words, but obviously somebody do, and some patent authorities accept. OSMF need to thread correctly into this matter, and temporarily removing potentially material is one of the steps. As far as I can see, none of SimonPoole's edits are actually redacting the  matter in question, his edits are more a "first response", like a "we have recieved your notice and prepare ourself for action. If this case turns toxic maybe SimonPoole will have to redact the edits with the contaminated trademark, let us hope it never comes to that.
The USPTO's mark awards have no jurisdiction outside of the States. 
Geocode Inc.'s CTM was 'absolutely refused' on grounds of genericism 
(prior art, if you will), by OHIM. This is an open-and-shut case!

> Let us all also work together in this case to show support to OSM and OSMF and do what can be done to undermine the claims from the issuer of the C+D in such a way that any court cases will tip in favour of OSM continuing what we always have done.
I like most others support the OSMF's contribution to the mapping 
projects. OSM has made great progress over the past few years.

There's no need to do anything to undermine the issuer's claims, they 
undermine themselves if they claim trade mark authority in Europe when 
no such authority exists. To fully protect their reg mark, Geocode would 
need to follow the procedures of the Madrid System and apply for an 
International TM to cover ~70 territories where they wish to protect the 
mark (including the USA).

OHIM handle Community Trade Marks for the EU (you can still register a 
mark solely for the UK without it covering the EU which is what it looks 
like Geocode tried to do). With it costing 600 Euros just to renew a CTM 
for ten years, I expect they don't think it's worth their while to file 
for an International trade mark... Given their existing refusal it's 
reasonable to assume they'd never get it. Geocode are trade mark trolling!

> I would very much like to see the C+D myself as I find the claims (as far as I have understood from the information already leaked) totally unacceptable, but have put myself with patience, at least until SimonPoole and OSMF have had time to get a formal advise from any legal partner.
Without seeing the specifics of the C&D (and now we're talking in 
circles), I still believe that any legal counsel worth their salt would 
instruct OSMF to refer Geocode to the response in Arkell v. Pressdram. 
I'm willing to stake five of the Queen's English pounds on this ;-)

If the legal advice substantially differs, I'll double this £5 then 
donate to the Foundation's fighting fund, and I'll become a paid-up OSMF 
member. May still become an OSMF member to vote in the next Board elections.