From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Robert J. Chassell" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: APOP support in movemail Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:56:36 +0000 (UTC) Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <2914-Thu06Nov2003114247+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> <3405-Sat08Nov2003183910+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1068469949 30554 80.91.224.253 (10 Nov 2003 13:12:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:12:29 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 10 14:12:26 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AJBqE-0000Pp-00 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:12:26 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AJBqD-00056m-00 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:12:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AJCbs-0000gq-L2 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 09:01:40 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AJCYw-0000BD-Jt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 08:58:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AJCYQ-0008Sr-Cr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 08:58:37 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.114.245] (helo=rattlesnake.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AJCYO-0008RO-F6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 08:58:05 -0500 Original-Received: by rattlesnake.com via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.115) Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:56:36 +0000 (UTC) Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org In-reply-to: (message from Karl Eichwalder on Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:51:43 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:17753 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:17753 The X Consortium requests that the following names be used when referring to this software: X X Window System X Version 11 X Window System, Version 11 X11 Please respect their decision. As I remember, the X Consortium introduced that language for legal purposes when the US government decided that Microsoft had the legal right, through its trade mark claim, to refer to its windowing system as the "Windows" system. The Microsoft claim was, in effect, that it was the only organization at the time, more than a decade ago, that worked with windowing systems. The decision implied that the competitors to Microsoft did not have windows, they had some more wordy, less generic alternative. The decision implied that the Apple Macintosh did not have Windows, nor did any of the Unix windowing systems. You may respect the decision of the US trade mark office but I do not. I used the word `Windows' before and still do to refer to X10 and X11 when talking with people for whom these are the salient window systems. It is misleading for me to do otherwise. But when I talk about some other version of windows, like Macintosh Windows -- more generally, when I talk with people for whom X is not salient -- I try to specify the version, Please bear in mind that trademark law has an overt and a covert purpose: it overt purpose, which is useful, is to reduce users' confusion. No two organizations are supposed to refer to their different products with the same name. Thus, a user is supposed to be able to use words to distinguish between the windows from Apple and the windows from the X Consortium. The covert purpose is to hide alternatives from people who do not know much. This is done both by making the speaking of the alternative less likely and by making it appear as if the trademarked word is the prime or general entity. Thus, because the trademarked term `Windows' is falsely general, many people do not bother to think about the history and alternatives to Microsoft Windows. The trademark office could have granted Microsoft a trademark on `Microsoft Windows'; that would have been reasonable. The use of the term would have prevented confusion. -- Robert J. Chassell Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8 http://www.teak.cc bob@rattlesnake.com