Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Commodore Phoenix questions  (Read 14613 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dammy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 2828
    • Show all replies
Re: Commodore Phoenix questions
« on: July 14, 2010, 10:29:13 AM »
Quote from: the_leander;570242
And those things won't be sorted until they have negotiated and agreed to a deal.



That would be because they, by the websites own admission, have no such licence.

As such, any sale of C= branded machines by this company is illegal until there is a valid licence held.


It's illegal use when and only when the C= IP owners say it is.  Verbal agreement is fine between them until the owners say it's not.  Until we hear that Barry is being sued to stop him from using C= logo, he apparently is in good standing with the IP owner.  Legally, I sure wouldn't want to be in Barry's shoes if the agreement is not executed, he's put himself in bad position marketing wise if this all blows up in his face.  But that's good for the C= IP holders, just another tool to get what they want out of Barry.
Dammy

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Arix-OS/414578091930728
Unless otherwise noted, I speak only for myself.
 

Offline dammy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 2828
    • Show all replies
Re: Commodore Phoenix questions
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2010, 09:49:47 PM »
Quote from: the_leander;570263
And Bernd Korz of Yellowtab totally had an agreement with Palm regarding the licensing of Be Inc IP.

Right up until Palm turned around and pimp slapped him when they decided that the direction he was taking wasn't to their liking...


That's the danger, license can be revoked.

Quote
Unless it is in writing, there is no proof of an agreement.


Depends on the law of the land,  Belgium, might be meaningless to have a verbal agreement, FL has a limited time (it's either 30 or 60 days) where verbal agreements are binding, if you can prove it was said.

Quote
And with regard use, it is technically illegal if you aren't licensed to trade under a brand not your own.


It's technically illegal if the IP owners says it is.  If it's fine with the IP owner, it's not illegal.

Quote
As you say however it would require the owners to act before it would be enforced unless it was a big ass company whose brand you were selling under.

As someone who got stung by Korz, I would never, ever again knowingly place myself in a situation of buying potentially infringing products.


I wouldn't have done it either, but I side on prudent and reasonable risk taking.  Barry has crawled too far out on that limb for my liking but if he and the IP owners are happy, good for him.

Quote
Until Barry gets a licence sorted. Steer well clear.


For end users, it's not going to matter a hill of beans.  Resellers, OTOH, should take notice to stay away from that tar baby.
Dammy

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Arix-OS/414578091930728
Unless otherwise noted, I speak only for myself.