41
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] smpl@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 months ago

If you modify a trademarked product and sell/distribute it, you can't use the trademarked name to describe it unless you get permission to do so.

[-] dgerard@awful.systems 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

unsurprisingly, it turns out to be vastly more complicated than that

[-] smpl@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago

Unless you refer to something other than violation of a trademark, I'm curious to know how it's more complicated than that?

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 2 months ago

WP was explicitly not a trademarked term

[-] smpl@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago

I haven't stumpled upon anything that complained about the use of the letters WP.

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 months ago

What do you think the trademark claim against WPEngine is exactly?

[-] o7___o7@awful.systems 11 points 2 months ago

New blog smell, most likely

[-] smpl@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[-] kgMadee2@mathstodon.xyz 5 points 2 months ago

@smpl @db0 yeah, which has 0 legs to stand on. Hence the question about nominative use ...

[-] smpl@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago

There does seem to be confusion among WPEngine customers from exhibit document. Whether they are in violation of the trademark or not is up to a judge to decide on. WPEngine have recently been doing a lot of changes on their website to clarify that they are not Wordpress. That does not automatically make them in violation, but it indicates that there were areas where they could have been more clear in their communication to customers.

[-] dgerard@awful.systems 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

explain to me your understanding of nominative use, for a start

(or, preferably, don't)

[-] smpl@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 months ago

That would be if WPEngine sold hosting of an unmodified Wordpress codebase.

[-] dgerard@awful.systems 17 points 2 months ago

you're on matt's legal team right

[-] smpl@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago
[-] kgMadee2@mathstodon.xyz 6 points 2 months ago

@smpl @dgerard well, you sure got the smarts

[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 10 points 2 months ago

what... what exactly do you think people like dreamhost and bluehost and such do? in your mind, do they have special dreampress and bluepress "vendored" versions of wordpress?

good lord

[-] smpl@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago

I'm only talking about trademark law. I'm not arguing what's morally right or wrong, that's a subjective perspective. I'm not able to tell if Dreamhost and Bluehost are violating the trademark, but from what I know they are generic webhosting companies and not as easily confused with Wordpress. In my personal opinion having had a quick look at Dreamhosts page about hosting Wordpress. It seems quite obvious that they only host the Wordpress software, with prominent phrases like "optimized for WordPress" and "Recommended by WordPress.org".

[-] self@awful.systems 7 points 2 months ago

photomatt? get the fuck off my instance photomatt

[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 5 points 2 months ago

wouldn't that just be funny as fuck

[-] self@awful.systems 5 points 2 months ago

the only way to know for sure is to do a Photography Matthew photo critique thread and see if I get a nasty letter

[-] dgerard@awful.systems 5 points 2 months ago

i'm not saying he's been sockpuppeting on the orange site, i'm just asking

[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 3 points 2 months ago

user: metamichael created: 23 hours ago

lul

this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
41 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1489 readers
31 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS