It seems that the Linux Foundation has decided that both “systemd” and “segmentation fault” (lol?) are trademarked by them.

  • thesmokingman@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    “Patent troll” and “required actions to preserve trademarks” are two totally different things. The former is objectively bad in all ways. The second is explainable if there truly is a trademark and said gear infringes on the trademark and may be excusable if the Linux Foundation is forced to act to preserve their branding (trademark law is weird). It’s even more explainable if this is a shitty auto filter some paralegal had to build without any technical review because IP law firms are hot fucking mess. I’m also very curious to see the original graphics which I couldn’t find on Mastodon. If they are completely unrelated and there was an explicit action by someone who knew better, the explanation provides no excuse.

    Attacking any company because the trademark process is stupid doesn’t accomplish much more than attacking someone paying taxes for participating in capitalism.

    • rhabarba@feddit.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Why does the Linux Foundation even have a trademark process for “segmentation fault”? According to the poster on Mastodon, these words were the whole design.

      • roguetrick@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Just like champagne only comes from the champagne region of France, true segmentation fault only comes from a linux program shitting itself.

        • bluGill@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          Linux is the imposter here. Segmentation fault refers to how the PDP-(I forget) hardware organized memory. It comes from the original unix implementation which linux has never had any part of.

          • deur@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            x86 and x86_64 still have segment registers so it’s not exactly entirely archaic, but they’re not really relevant so that doesnt change what you said. I dont have the exact details on who implemented segmentation first, so I cant elaborate on that.

  • tate@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    The complaint is not about the terms “systemd” and “segmentation fault.” Those are the titles of the affected artworks. Presumably the artworks themselves contain some trademarked property.

    Also, this is utterly unrelated to patents.

      • tate@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Thanks for finding these. I couldn’t see them, so I assumed they were removed in response to the complaint.

        You’re right, there doesn’t appear to be anything here to object to.