From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: imp@bsdimp.com (M. Warner Losh) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:17:25 -0700 (MST) Subject: [TUHS] 32I status as of 17 Nov 2003 In-Reply-To: References: <200311171640.hAHGeOwB024089@wwws.monmouth.com> Message-ID: <20031117.151725.90804030.imp@bsdimp.com> In message: Brantley Coile writes: : > 8. 32I is the interim name. I would have preferred Unix version 7, but : > can't for obvious trademark reasons. : : I'm not sure if the current trademark owners can retro actively : disassociate a mark after the fact. If it WAS Unix 32V it still IS Unix : 32v. : I suppose if you do much more than port it to Intel one could argue : that it's not Unix 32V anymore. Just because you have a piece of code that was marketed under tradename Foo(R) doesn't mean that you have the right to use that trade name to market the code. I'd steer clear of the Unix name unless you want the Open Group to contact you (and they will when they find out about your use). While the Open Group is fairly easy to work with, there are a number of non-negotiable uses of the word Unix that they will not permit. This is one of them. Warner