The End of the Free PCI Device List (Update) 689
imann writes "For many years, Jim Boemler was the maintainer of a free PCI device table which reference all the PCI ID's of PCI Devices. This service is used by Free Operating Systems for keeping up to date their pci device list. That was a very usefull service for us (i was working in a Linux distro in the hardware suport team). It was wonderfull until the PCI-SIG had their lawyers cease and desisted him to stop this service because of the use of the PCI logo AND name ! You don't have the right to use the three letters P,C,I ! Incredible... So he was forced to close his website.
This is a incredible loss for the hardware support in the Free Software world. I hope PCI-SIG will change its position !
Please support Jim." A friend emailed me to point out that many /.ers have been emailing the wrong person to complain....read on for details...
Jamal wrote, "The story you posted is causing us a headache. Our CTO, Alan Deikman is being bombarded by emails from people reading that story.
Alan is not the person in charge of the PCI SIG, his only sin is that Znyx
did host the PCI sig in the early 90s and he was the list maintainer. This
was a gracious act and should not be rewarded the way it is now. Infact he is
trying to help the gent with that website to see if things get resolved." Alan's email was posted on the page we linked to, erroneously.
I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:4, Insightful)
What did Shakespeare say about lawyers? (Score:5, Interesting)
This article needs to be on a few more websites, [overlawyered.com]
I'd say change the name and thumb your nose at them... this is too valuable a service to lose to some copyright holder and their nitpicking attorneys.
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:5, Funny)
Isn't this just typical of a scared group trying to save their market? Its the same old story:
10 years ago, they were the darlings of the media. Everyone couldn't get enough of their product. They stomped all other competition (ISA) until they were the exclusive provider in their market space (motherboards) for several years. But, technology advanced, and soon they weren't the best any more (AGP). New products arrived that did things better and faster in smaller space. And though they still have a majority market share, they know that they simply can't keep up.
* shakes head * Its always sad to watch a bus format die...
Instructions for use of this post: Insert tounge in cheek. Read as normal.
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:5, Informative)
PCI Lists -- Current Status (Score:5, Informative)
There's been quite an outpouring of support for me and the Lists since I took them down two days ago. I'm gratified by that -- it's nice to know that what I've been doing has been of benefit to people.
I've spent the last hour or so talking with the President of the PCI-SIG. He's been very gracious, and has accepted responsibility for the lawyer's actions (though more due to his inaction than a desire to get the lawyer involved). We will be meeting next week to discuss how to proceed. While I still consider the net effect to be pretty outrageous (at least until measured against the rest of our litigious society), I want to stress that the President didn't start this ball rolling consciously, and is making a good faith effort to find a reasonable solution.
The SIG has been flooded by mail on this issue, enough that it's keeping them from doing their real work. They really have gotten the message from the PCI community at this point, so I'd ask you to think twice before sending them more mail on the subject. I'll keep the web site updated as things progress.
jim
Re:PCI Lists -- Current Status (Score:5, Interesting)
~Z
Re:PCI Lists -- Current Status (Score:3, Informative)
I can't find any way to contact you: No email addresses anywhere. You may want to fix that....
My understanding as a non-lawyer is that they can force you to stop using the logo. They might also be able to stop you from using the letters PCI if you were to refer to something that they didn't want to be called PCI.
So, IMHO, you'd be OK if you just remove the logo from your site.
Also, if they disagree with the content on your site, they have a valid claim to want to distantiate themselves from it. However, you now have written proof that they WANT to be associated with the information on your site: they are saying they want your information on their own site!
Anyway, good luck with the meeting next week!
Roger.
Re:PCI Lists -- Current Status (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:5, Insightful)
They aren't asking for any money. In fact, this is one of the most amicable cease and desist letters I've seen. The letter didn't state anything about the information. They were merely defending their trademark. The letter basically offers two valid options. They can either try to come to an agreement to post this information on the legitimate PCI site, or they can remove all "confusing" references to PCI-SIG. Basically, the company just doesn't want its customers to think this is a site that they sanctioned. What am I missing here?
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:5, Insightful)
What your missing here, is the guy is upset because he has done a service that has helped PCI. When they had a problem with him, instead of just giving him a call on the phone, they send in the lawyers.
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:5, Interesting)
Simple... (Score:5, Informative)
There's your paper trail.
If negotiation above fails, THEN send in the lawyers. Lawyers aren't so bad when you're expecting them and they're simply finalizing something you've already negotiated.
My dad used to work for the intellectual property division of a large company. (Now retired, and consulting in the same field.) Almost all contact with other companies started with a phone call from him or a polite letter saying in effect, "Hey, you seem to be infringing one of our patents. Let's talk about this to see if we can reach an agreement." If that failed, THEN the lawyers were called in. But in 99% of cases, the lawyers were only called in to tie up loose ends and finalize an agreement after a few rounds of negotiations between non-lawyers.
Nope (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see it that way. I see the lawyers being used as a legal framework so that things don't get wierd if there's a problem. The letter was extremely polite, and invited him to give them a call to discuss the issue.
Another important thing to remember is that PCI-SIG doesn't have control over information found in the free PCI device table. As such, they don't want any confusion over liability should some of the information be wrong. One of the listed methods of remedying the conflict suggests that this may have been their primary purpose for getting the lawyers involved.
Here's an interesting point I found. His website mentions that first contact was on January 13, and that it was a threatening letter with reference to a previous communication they claim to have sent. Unless the letter received on Jan 13 is different from the one sent on Dec 30, I don't see the letter as particularly threatening. If they are the same, then I would submit that Jim's reaction is a kneejerk one. A 30 minute contact with PCI-SIG would probably generate a solution that was satisfactory to all parties.
Another interesting point is that he has proof that PCI-SIG was aware of his site for more than five years. During this time, they made no effort to defend their trademark. Any lawyers out there know how this might impact the validity of the trademark?
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:3, Interesting)
Or something like that
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:3, Insightful)
It's about as polite as it can be in a letter of this nature. They had to make that statement. It is still a cease and desist letter, and they needed to make it very clear what the alternative to compliance was. As a counter example, the letter also indicates a desire to resolve the matter amicably, and offers the possibility of including the data on the official PCI-SIG website. If I were the author, I'd have jumped at the chance.
Image that your dog gets out and digs up your neighbors flowers. Would your rather
A: have your neighbor come over and ask you to keep your dog tied up.
B: Recieve a letter in the mail saying "From the law offices of attorney so and so. We will not tolerate your dog digging up my flowers. If you do not stop him we will sue, but I hope to resolve this in a friendly manner."
I'm sure you're well aware that this isn't the same thing at all. The case of the dog that dug up my flowers is a whole lot more clear-cut than trademark disputes. Also bear in mind that this particular instance may have been one of many potential "trademark violations" that was being pursued by PCI-SIG. If they had a whole list of situations to look at, it's not surprising that first contact came from the lawyer.
Try thinking on this. It's considered common wisdom to realize that life is only about 10% what happens to you and 90% how you deal with it. In my eyes, Jim failed this test. Completely taking down the website and giving up hurts free OS development a whole lot more than PCI-SIG. However, we can always hope that after careful reflection, he'll change his mind and try to work with PCI-SIG.
Do I think PCI-SIG handled things in the wrong way? Sure! They should have accepted Jim's original offer to put everything on their site. But my guess is that there was a management change or something and that information got lost in the shuffle. However, I still think Jim's reaction was out-of-line. Still, it's his project. He can shut it down if he'd like, although I'd rather see him at least give all the data to somebody else for maintaining.
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:3, Insightful)
However in this case, PCI-SIG almost did exactly that. They "appreciated" the effort of a single individual for over six years and THEN sent in the lawyers. PCI-SIG didn't sue though...they just basically threatened to.
--K.
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:5, Informative)
This fellow is using PCI descriptively, not branding:
" Pursuant to 33(b)(4) of the Lanham Act, a defense to a claim of trademark infringement exists where:
(4) the use of the name, term, or device charged to be an infringement is a use, otherwise than as a mark . . . of a term or device which is descriptive of and used fairly and in good faith only to describe the goods or services of such party, or their geographic origin. . .
But more importantly, although I can't find a reference, you can't violate a trademark if you are not a commercial concern. I can call that box of facial tissues Kleenexes all day long and there's nothing legally that can be done about it.
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Hijack request) (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd suggest (IANAL) that he simply remove any copies of the PCI logo and put up a disclaimer that he has absolutely no affiliation with the PCI-SIG group other than the fact that they tried to shut down his website and hi-jack the database from him.
Re:I mean, c'mon now, really (Score:4, Interesting)
It's just about corporate stupidity and pride. Some suit found the website and went crazy, no business plan, no money to be made, it's just about pride, envy and stupidity. And by the way, what else has PCI-SIG to do except surfing the web all day long and bragging about how great they are?
For a better understanding look here [dilbert.com], large organizations really work that way.
PCI-SGI may be stupid, but they are not so stupid to really believe they can make serious money on selling such a service.
This is likely (Score:4, Insightful)
Often, people will post information about our company and its operation. I don't know why they do it, and who cares.
When the marketing people find these sites, they immediately send a cease-and-desist. I try to explain that these people are customers and enjoy our site. That they help our brand by encouraging our customers and fans.
Marketing says "no, it dilutes our brand, there will be confusion blah blah blah" and they piss off our best customers via our legal staff. Its pointless. I think they need something to do with their spare time.
So I go out of my way to make sure marketing doesn't see the sites. Its stupid. It serves no one except someone thinks they're a fucking geniuses and they're not.
Sometimes you're giving people too much credit. Mostly people do dumb things because they're dumb.
rename it to: (Score:5, Funny)
Could they still get you on that?
Or GNPCI? (Score:3, Funny)
Not really, but they're bigger. (Score:3, Interesting)
For example, you can't trademark Wrench brand wrenches, you CAN trademark Wrench brand apples.
The three letters are easier to defend as a trademark if they're just three letters, not if they stand for something related.
(That's a tough one though, there's alot of action over three letter trademarks right now.)
Either way, three letters are pretty generic, so they probably CAN'T get you on that, strictly speaking, but they're bigger and have more money, and he who has the gold makes the rules, so therefore, they can.
I'm not an expert, but I do play one on TV.
Re:rename it to: (Score:5, Funny)
Boycott! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Boycott! (Score:3, Funny)
Weenies. Point-to-point is the only way to wire.
Re:Boycott! (Score:3, Interesting)
What's the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
His work helped guide people to use PCI. He spent thousands of dollars out of his own pocket for the love of a product. The owners of that product thanked him for 6 years of work by kicking him in the nuts.
So, maybe you like taking it over a barrel like that, but he doesn't (nor would I).
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
-sk
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, given that I did read the letter and the site:
Jim's beef with the PCI-SIG is that they didn't have the courtesy to contact him before resorting to lawyers. I think that's reasonable. Perhaps instead of responding to your post, I should hire someone to knock on your door tomorrow morning at 5:30am and scream "Your post was ignorant!". See the difference?
In any case, after ignoring his prior offers of assistance and insulting him, the PCI-SIG needs to offer to buy the list from him, say for about the amount of money he's spent hosting it all these years.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
Senario 1: Hi Mr. Web Site Maintainer. We here at Fantasy PCI-SIG need to protect our copyright. Please remove your logo since it may cause confusion in the marketplace. This is a purely legal decision because we both know that the "marketplace" knows the difference between your database and our product, but, unfortunatly the lawyers made us do it. We apologize for the inconvienece and please keep up your good work.
Senario 2: Yo. We will sue you. You mean nothing to us. Our lawyers are fed on the blood of babies and will leave you and your family destitute. We know where you live. We know where you work. When we are through with you your parents won't recognize your corpse.
What was described was senario 2. Maybe I have a thin skin, I'd "take the ball home with me" as well if faced with that kind of letter. This is another case of attacking with lawyers when a little bit of respect would have achieved a far better end.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Informative)
They "request" he work through his employer (IBM) to "investigate" basically handing over the database to PCI-SIG for their own website. They didn't say anything about him retaining control, IBM having control, or IBM publishing the website. They make it very clear that they do not want him to continue hosting the listing.
As for their claims of confusion in the marketplace, I find that very unlikely. His database has been around for a long time and no one has confused him as the PCI-SIG. This isn't the only database or listing of vendor and device IDs. Furthermore, no one can confuse these lists with an official PCI-SIG list as there isn't an official list.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:3, Insightful)
He gets a C&D. He takes down the Logo and Spells out PCI or calls it a card database or something.
There, he's ceases and desisted.
They invited him to continue his website (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They invited him to continue his website (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine if an IBM exec called him up, and invited him into his office. The exec then thanks him for his hard work on the site, and says that the PCI-SIG is interested in interested in turning it into an official site of the organization, and is willing to pay him $25,000 to take ownership of the site, promises to give the site a good home on servers that they'll pay for. If he accepts, IBM will offer to maintain the site for the PCI-SIG, and his job responsiblities will be changed so that he'll still be the editor of the site, but now on it'd be on company time with access to IBM's PR and legal resources to help him.
Just treat people with a little respect, and they're more likely to do what you want. Give the money that you're spending on the lawyer to write the C&D to the guy who actually did all the work, and they'd have exactly what they wanted. Instead, he took the C&D at face value and ceased and desisted. Talk about wrong tool for the job...
Re:What's the problem? (Score:3, Insightful)
The notion of removing all occurrences of the string "PCI" is self-defeating, as it hampers the ability of search engines to find the site. It would probably suffice to remove the logo, add "PCI is a registered trademark of so-and-so" and "this site has no relation to PCI-SIG". It is galling to have to ask an attorney about such matters. An alternative is to do what's suggested above and to move it out of the US, to a country that still allows corporations to be criticized.
Quick (Score:5, Funny)
Solution (Score:2, Insightful)
Err, but..., well..., ähm.
What do we learn from this? Standards need to be free.
Huh? (Score:5, Interesting)
And why do my posts start at 1 all of a sudden. The worlds gone mad, and I never noticed.....
Re:Huh? (Score:2, Informative)
Clear fair use. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Clear fair use. (Score:4, Funny)
Clear abuse of process (Score:4, Interesting)
Anybody can sue anybody for anything... it's just that you won't always win. Most people see a C&D and shut down not because they think they'll lose the lawsuit, but because they think (and usually are right) that they're going to be sued. In this case, the cost of defending his site in court, even if he's sure of winning, is more than the money he's making providing a free service.
So, it's simply not worth it to him to defend himself. Game over, they win without even needing to go to court.
You _always_ win if... (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft can sue me because i wear blue-jeans. They _will_ win.
Re:Clear fair use. (Score:4, Insightful)
He didn't buckle, he changed his mind abou the PCI-SIG. Previously he was fan of the group and supported them by creating a very useful website. They threatened him with a lawsuit. I think it's perfectly reasonable for him to no longer be a fan and to decline to support them with his website.
hmm (Score:2, Funny)
M I C R O S O F T
or
W I N D O W S
all in a row
Let 'em know ... (Score:2, Interesting)
So you, my virtual friends, will have to find another way. I'm sure you're thrilled. If you care to express yourself to the PCI-SIG or it's hired shark, here's how:
* I don't have an official contact for the PCI-SIG, nor do I know just which of their luminaries decided to sic the dogs on me, but a good contact would be Alan Deikman (Alan.Deikman AT znyx.com).
* The lawyer is Michael A. Cohen (mcohen AT schwabe.com) of Schwabe, Williamson, and Wyatt, P.C., in Portland.
* You might also post your thoughts on the PCI-SIG's reflector, if you're on that list.
Money, money, money, money, money.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry, but just had to get that off my chest.
I don't know if's just my inexperience with our capitalist society or what, but my impression is that these kind of lawsuits increase as time passes keep getting more and more outrageous.
Sure, you could argue that PCI-SGI have the right to their IP, but _come_on_! What's the advantage for them closing down a site like this? Doesn't make any sense to me...
Maybe someone can enlighten me, but this just sounds very stupid, weird, or fushy...
Way to go dumbass! (Score:2)
Now their lawyers are going to shut down Slashdot for using the brand name on their website as well. (Though I'm sure that I didn't help much by using it in my post either.)
We need to tell PCI-SIG (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't see how this group is going to come out ahead by doing this. The small amount of money the y (might) take in selling the information is going to be dramatically offset by the much larger amount of money their sponsors/patrons lose in sales.
Re:We need to tell PCI-SIG (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:We need to tell PCI-SIG (Score:3, Informative)
Re:We need to tell PCI-SIG (Score:4, Insightful)
I read the letter. There's a difference between what they say and what their actions indicate. It's a little like firing an olive branch at someone from a cannon (at close range).
People who really want to resolve a situation amicably do NOT follow that statement with a threat. If they had wanted to handle the situation amicably, the letter should have come from a director. It should have indicated their interest in hosting the list in an official capacity and asked (not demanded) that he contact them. Acknowledging the value of the list and his work would be a nice touch. Odds are, that would have been enough.
If they had real problems with his use of the marks, they could have indicated the problem and suggested appropriate ways to remedy the situation (such as please remove the actual logo and add text saying 'PCI is a blah blah blah'). I'll bet that would have been enough as well.
Frankly, every C&D letter I've seen (both reasonable and not so reasonable) was quite rude. They allways read like the 'this is your final warning' speech from the evil space alien. The letter would have been appropriate iff he had failed to respond to an earlier and more polite approach.
Perhaps we should recommend some good books on ettiquite to the lawyers and the PCI-SIG collectively.
Easy solution (Score:5, Interesting)
'Open Standard' closed by lawyers... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, really 'open standard' when they Cease and Desist people compiling a list of device IDs!
--Azaroth
Foot, shoe, gun (Score:5, Interesting)
That also begs a question - does trademark allow you to prevent use of a word totally or just for marketing purposes. I seem to remember from school that suing someone claiming their product was "a PCI card" that wasn't licensed to do so is one thing, but saying "this card works in PCI bus systems" is quite another... and not actionalble.
Slashdot Article Uses PCI! Uh oH! (Score:2)
Why? (Score:2)
Why would the non-profit PCI-SIG care if some regular Joe compiles a list of PCI-IDs, puts them on a website, and uses the PCI logo? Isn't the point of non-profit organizations to overcome adversaties and improve the betterment of life? While they certainly have a legal base for this, doesn't this violate the spirit of a non-profit company, and if so, why can't we remove their non-profit status and make them start paying taxes or something?
It seems to me that since a non-profit company exists to benefit the country (and therefore is not taxed the same), that we, the country, should have some grounds to fight back. WHere are those grounds, and if they don't exist, who has the force to push such legislation through US Congress?
This sucks.
There's something a little distasteful here. (Score:5, Interesting)
Does it really take eight years to file a trademark, or does this seem more like something they did specifically so they could sue other people? Maybe this guy is just the poor test case. Try it on him and if it works, go for a bigger fish...
Trademarks are established by *use*. . . (Score:3, Informative)
In fact, one of the steps necessary to register a trademark is showing that you're already *using* it as such.
This prevents the trademark equivilent of cybersquatting. You can't simply go through the dictionary and register every word. It just doesn't work like that.
This is a Good Thing(tm).
KFG
Not at all uncommon (Score:3, Informative)
In point of fact, *most* trademarks, perfectly legitimate, are *never* registered and of those that are most are years, or even decades, old at the time of registration.
This is the norm.
Ok, it isn't the norm for big marketing outfits like GE or IBM who "brand" their own pee, but the PCI group isn't such a big marketing outfit.
Yes, it's true that the PCI group have registered the mark in order to make it easier to defend it on the national and internatioal level, but that isn't anything nefarious, that's the explicit *purpose* of mark registration. The fact that they've done it now is simply an indication that *now* is when their lawyers belive that such is relevant and worth the time, effort and money.
The reason most legitimate marks are never registered is because it is *never* relevant to defend them on a national scale, like, say, "Joe's Used Cars." However, there's nothing to say that Joe couldn't run his local used car lot for 40 years and then "make the big time" and go national, at which point he might then find it advantageous to register his 40 year old mark, for the first time.
KFG
And the best line from the article... (Score:4, Funny)
Man, and most of us just take, take, take... Open source, or open pants?
Doesn't quite sound right (Score:4, Interesting)
* PCI is kind of like "kleenex"; It's a common-place word that is used to describe something, usually not a company or organization. If I recall correctly, there was a legal ruling about pretty much this same situation, the plantif being Kleenex. The court did not rule in Kleenex's favor.
* If we really want to get nitty-gritty about it, couldn't he just replace every instance of "PCI" in his site with "Peripheral Component Interconnect bus", thus (all be it wordy) technically describing the DEVICE, and not using the "trademarked PCI name"?
* How does this fall under the "please don't buy our hardware dept."??? It doesn't seem that PCI-SIG even SELLS hardware.
Call a lawyer (Score:5, Insightful)
Check with a lawyer first, but it probably just comes down to.
Re:Call a lawyer (Score:3, Interesting)
The way to adjust your "friends'" behavior is not to hire a lawyer.
Sure, the logo usage might have been questionable, but that was only half the C&D's "proposal". Discontinuing use of the word/phrase/letters PCI? How is it at all reasonable to hire a lawyer to send a D&C about that?
They have his email. They obviously have his snail mail. They probably have his phone number, too. If they'd have sent a quick 'hey, Legal is fussing about you using the logo' he'd have taken it off. No need to be complete raging assholes about it. Why continue the 'friendship'?
I've had people steal from my sites before (Purity Test [fuck-you.org]) - never maliciously. Just an 'oops' or a lack of understanding of what they should be doing. A quick note fixes everything. If someone ever said 'piss of jerk', believe me - my girlfriend's a lawyer - I would make their life uncomfortable. But that would be last resort.
If it's a question of legality, why not have a lawyer look at your email or whatever? No need to have the cronies doing it outright.
PCI-SIG Board of Directors (Score:5, Interesting)
Guess who shows up at the top of the list when you follow the link?
Chair
Tony Pierce
Microsoft Corporation
Well. That explains a lot.
The background to this (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, just guess what? We found someone doing it. That proves we don't just sit around all day. Give us some money and we will frighten him into stopping. Oh, we just discovered he works for IBM. Potential oops there, but we do charge by the letter and no letter no dough. So how about we suggest to him that he gives us his data so you can have some real meat to put on your lame website?"
Of course I would never suggest for one moment that the text above has any resemblance to the activities of any real lawyers anywhere in the United States of America, or indeed the free world. Not at all. Lawyers are selfless, altruistic, their wives are beautiful (or their husbands are hunky, it is 2003) and their kids are perfectly behaved. Every day they go out to work to make life better for the rest of us. But I seem to be meandering off topic.
let their public relations firm know..... (Score:5, Informative)
[http://www.pcisig.com/membership/contact_us]
General and Administration:
PCI Special Interest Group (PCI-SIG)
5440 SW Westgate Dr., #217
Portland, OR 97221
Phone: 503-291-2569
FAX: 503-297-1090
administration@pcisig.com
Media & Analyst Contact:
Lisa Sherwin
VTM Public Relations
Phone: 503-297-3704
Fax: 503-297-1090
lsherwin@vtm-inc.com
Now just wait a minute here ... (Score:5, Informative)
Second, if he uses the word PCI, they surely can't stop him from just using it (which is a lot different than naming his site PCI something or another). i.e. If his site is the "Free List of PC Addon Cards" and he states within his site that the add on cards are restricted to those supporting PCI, then I can't see how they can bust him for that.
Third, in the C&D letter, they end it by saying that they recommend that he figure out a way to possibly have his site under the auspices of PCI-SIG. So fine, they aren't opposed to the concept of the site and they appear (at least on the surface) to be willing to work with him. So it doesn't appear to me to be quite as bad as everyone is making it out to be. Now if they were saying that he couldn't publish the information contained within the site, now THAT would be worthy of outrage.
Check Out Chilling Effects (Score:5, Informative)
Search [chillingeffects.org] their database for the various notices. You're probably not alone. Others can probably give you advice on where to turn...
For all the conspiracy theorist out there. (Score:5, Informative)
PCI-SIG Board of Directors [pcisig.com]
Contact Info (Score:5, Informative)
General and Administration:
PCI Special Interest Group (PCI-SIG)
5440 SW Westgate Dr., #217
Portland, OR 97221
Phone: 503-291-2569
FAX: 503-297-1090
administration@pcisig.com
Media & Analyst Contact:
Lisa Sherwin
VTM Public Relations
Phone: 503-297-3704
Fax: 503-297-1090
lsherwin@vtm-inc.com
---
Snail-mail or phone calls are the only things that'll make a difference.
What's in a name (or logo)? (Score:3, Interesting)
Ok, that wasn't a nice thing to do, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
2. I think Jim over-reacted. Perhaps he didn't realise quite how much not only the PCI group, but free sotware developers depended on his list. In computing, there really is no room for wounded pride.
My email to PCI-SIG... (Score:4, Interesting)
Cc: mcohen@schwabe.com
Subject: I can't believe you guys shut down the free PCI device table!!!
I can't believe you guys shut down the free PCI device table!!! I'm flabbergasted. I can't think of any possible reason you would do this. Don't you have anything else better to do than close down an extrememly helpful website? The webmaster spent thousands of dollars out of his own pocket for the love of a product. The owners of that product now thank him for 6 years of work by kicking him in the proverbial nuts? We all know it was just a guy helping other guys out, and that he had no relation to your company. What exactly do you have to gain from this? What do you lose by having more systems support your architecture? This makes zero sense. He helped people to use your technology. He pushed your technology! He was free advertisement. And all the time he has been doing this, we have thought of you as one of the FEW, RARE consortiums that were not COMPLETELY out of touch with your users. Well, now we can see that you are. You are only interested in money, and you view all your clients as potential thiefs, and potential defendants. Yesterday you were an example, but today, you're just a statistic. You're just another consumer-crushing entity. Instead of a group that people look to for help, you've become a power-, money-, and blood-thirsty group that people fear because you have no respect for them, their interests, or their rights; only your bottom line. Well, time to push you from the small stack of reputable groups on the right, to the huge, towering pile of examples of immoral societal plagues on the left.
It was nice while it lasted.
Kurt
Oh this is rich, get this: (Score:4, Informative)
Copied directly from the cease-and-desist:
"Your website indicates that you are an employee of IBM, a PCI-SIG member. We therefore request that you work through IBM to investigate the possibility of creating a similar database of PCI Vendor ID numbers which would be available on the official PCI-SIG website. In the meantime, however, be advised that PCI-SIG will not tolerate co-existence with your website, in its present form."
So basically this is an attempt to steal his content and have it added to their website. Or in other words, we love your content and we want it but we want it for free and if you argue we'll crush you. Sleazy bastards.
Isn't there some way around this? (Score:3, Insightful)
- remove the actual logo
- change everything to read PCI compatible
- add the TM symbol where appropriate
- say that it's a PCI device 'review' site
But whatever he could've done all that can be said about this is fsck PCI. Reprehensible is all they are...if it was possible to purchase a PC without PCI I would - come to think of it I can probably get a lot of stuff as USB drivers.
Perhaps he should change the name... (Score:3, Funny)
(The F standing, of course, for Free and unaF.U.lliated)
The C&D letter (Score:3, Informative)
Seems to me that they only are staking out legal grounds for complaining about the logo. Never mind that they object to the letters PCI - they don't claim legal ownership of the letters.
So the actual complaint is that PCI-SIG's lawyers are concerned that Boemler's site might be implying PCI-SIG is endorsing his material. I can't guess how many sites include a disclaimer - but if Boemler adds one, I'd think that would handle their complaint.
Maybe this is part of their complaint? But this is also playing dirty - they're threatening the guy's job. Not outright, but it's implied. I already don't like these lawyers.
But: (and with the IANAL) PCI-SIG is complaining about the use of the logo. Then they are putting forward the removal of the name and logo as a solution. Scare tactics, they want him to completely cave in ... but they haven't staked out enough ground (yet?) to demand the whole thing.
Come up with a different name? (Score:3, Interesting)
SIG Logo usage guidelines.... (Score:3, Informative)
Their logo usage guidelines are at:
http://www.pcisig.com/data/developers/PCI-SIG_Log
Yeah. I know. It's a zip. But I don't feel like slashdotting my server today.
PCI-SIG List Admin's Response (Score:5, Informative)
--
To pci-sig list members and other individuals in the blind-cc to this
message.
I am receiving quite a few e-mails about the situation with Jim Boemler's
web site, which he has felt compelled to take down. I wasn't aware of this
situation until the first of these e-mails arrived, and having looked into
it I think the situation is as outrageous as obviously many of you do.
However, you should all be aware that neither I personally, or my company
ZNYX Networks has anything to do with this situation. ZNYX Networks is not
currently a member of the PCI SIG. We allowed our membership to lapse a
number of years ago since it was obvious we were not going to be active in
any standards setting efforts. As for me or any employee of ZNYX Networks,
we are not now or ever have been an official of the SIG. If you read Mr.
Boemler's web page more carefully, you will note that he does not list me
as anything other than a possible contact, since he mentions he is not
clear who should be contacted, other than the "shark" that is doing the
legal work.
We have e-mailed Mr. Boemler (and cc'ed this message) to clarify our
position, and I will offer any aid I can.
To clarify our position, we run the pci-sig mailing list as a general
service to the community as a whole the same way Jim Boemler does (did) his
web site. Back in 1992-3 when we first started, there were much fewer
people around who could set up a mailing list so we did it. As with Mr.
Boemler, we don't get paid for it, and we have offered to turn the work
over to the SIG since we felt that it is more properly a SIG service, but
so far there has been no positive reply. Now I am wondering if I am going
to get a present in the mail like Jim did! (I really don't think that
will be the case, since we don't do a web page, but the parallel is
evident.)
To any REAL PCI-SIG officials: would you care to post a comment?
Alan Deikman
ZNYX Networks, Inc.
Google rules (Score:4, Interesting)
Now PCI-SIG has to go after Google, and Kazaa, and 1000's of Linux users. Someone keep updating the list, pass it around. Don't let it die.
PCI Vendor list - let's put them everywhere...! (Score:3, Informative)
I suspect the wayback machine, while considerably slower, would have the CSV files and a few other items which the Google cache does not have.
Lastly, I agree with Jim that this is a really bad way for a non-profit group to act. I understand the pain of seeing someone you are supporting claim your hard earned work is somehow damaging to them, but suggesting that they'd like to have it anyway. Looking back it's easy to regret spending so much time on something which 'get[s] no respect'.
I hope that regardless of what PCI-sig claims or does, Jim finds a way to keep this valuable community resource available to those thousands who appreciate his effort, time, and money. I hope that it remains a free community resource. I hope that Jim isn't offended by Google's cache, and the possibility that others might continue his work, but I can't stand by and let someone destroy their creation to spite a third party, when that creation is of such value to so many others.
-Adam
Blame the law, not PCI-SIG (Score:3, Informative)
As an extreme example, if PCI-SIG did not pursue it legally in this case, and a few other cases, someone could re-assign pins on the PCI connector, and call their device a "PCI" card. When PCI-SIG went after them, the infringing firm could claim that "PCI" had become a generic term due to PCI-SIG's lack of protecting their trademark, and potentially win the case.
That's why phrases like "xerox machine" or "styrofoam cooler" sometimes result in C&D letters. It's not necessarily that Xerox does not want its name to be synonymous with copiers, but rather they must protect their trademark or lose it.
Re:Blame the law, not PCI-SIG (Score:4, Informative)
Don't be silly, they didn't have to send him a cease and desist. It would have been easier and cheaper to send him a brief letter thanking him for his work and granting him an explicit license to use the mark, perhaps with some conditions attached.
XXX Vendor and Device Lists (Score:4, Funny)
The proxy at my office have a rule to filter every page wich contains the XXX expression.
I'm trying to guess if moderators will find this comment interesting or funny
http://www.pcisig.com/feedback (Score:3, Interesting)
Overreaction... (Score:3, Interesting)
If he thinks PCI-SIG (except for the legal branch) has anything against his site, I think he's mistaken. Probably they didn't know about the whole fuzz before they read about it in their inbox or on Slashdot. And while he might have had his site up for ages, and done a lot of good for PCI, that does not matter to a lawyer that sees a violation. And legally, there probably was one. The letters PCI hardly have any copyright, but the logo definately does and I don't see how fair use applies here. I think a lawyer that promoted himself to be judge by letting good sites "slide" would be out of a job pretty quick.
I can see how he's hurt but this isn't very different from fansites for movies / bands / cartoons / whatever that's been asked to stop using copyrighted stuff. I'm sorry, but I don't really see what justifies going overboard like this...
Kjella
What this really means (Score:5, Informative)
Anyone familiar with trademark and copyright laws understands the cease and desist letter for what it is...something the holders of PCI trademark MUST send to anyone who uses their trademark without first being granted the right to use it.
There is absolutely no reason to read malice into the C & D letter as Mr. Boemler has. The law is very clear on this point...if you don't *defend* your trademark vigorously as soon as you learn that others are using it without your authorization, you can lose your trademark rights. The C&D letter did NOT imply, in any way, that Mr. Boemler had to discontinue his website. The section requesting (note the lawyer's use of the word "request" rather than "demand") he work through IBM was only a suggestion. Its presence in the C&D letter obviously confused people who might be inclined to see its proximity to the previous demand to remove their trademark as an additional demand.
As other posters have indicated, all that Mr. Boemler needs to do is to stop using PCI in ways that violate their trademark.
Re:What this really means (Score:5, Funny)
- You just said "PCI" w/o permission.
- But so did you. You said "PCI" w/o permission.
- You just said "You said PCI w/o permission"
- You just said "You said you just said PCI.."
- You said "You said you said you said you said..
(Stack Overflow..)
Another PCI device/vendor ID database available (Score:4, Informative)
http://pciids.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
This site has another PCI device/vendor ID database.
Better save it while you can! There are download links available to get the entire table. Since the PCI-SIG has crushed the old yourvote.com site, there's no telling how long they will let this other site remain up, since it has similar content.
You might have the file already!
Download the latest version anyway, so your distribution is up to date. This file provides the human-readable names for tools such as lspci.
OK, here's my letter. (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't copy it, but feel free to make similar points. My take on this is this is probably a young, inexperienced lawyer who thought it was big and cool to go in with all guns blazing, and is now (I suspect) desperately trying to dig himself out of the shit. If, on the other hand, PCI-SIG actually instructed him to write in these terms, they deserve everything they get.
Dear Michael Cohen
I appreciate that you're probably getting a lot of grief from strangers today, and probably feel bewildered and a little hurt. You probably feel that you were just doing your job, and that people (including me) are just shooting the messenger.
That's true, of course, to a degree. But in this case it isn't an adequate excuse. Yes, as a lawyer, your job is, in the end, to do what your client instructs. But when your client instructs you to do something extraordinarily foolish and liable to cause grave damage to your clients' own interests, part of a responsible lawyers duty is to councel caution and reflection.
Your clients members are, as a consequence of your action, denied access to a data resource which is vital to them. To replace this resource, which you have by your action denied to them, will cost them many thousands of dollars, delay development of new devices, and cause untold confusion. At the same time, their goodwill and reputation among the technical community on which they depend is in tatters. What possible benefit did you see to your client, and how do you propose that they should go about repairing the damage that has been caused?
After a letter as unnecessarily offensive and aggressive as that which is posted here http://www.yourvote.com/pci/Scanned_.pdf [yourvote.com] over your signature, saying sorry is not likely to be enough. This isn't a matter of ego, virility, and big swinging dicks. It's a community where people provide resources out of good will and a spirit of co-operation, and you cannot simply go rampaging about in your elephant boots. You (and your clients) have a very great deal of humble pie to eat.
Yours Sincerely
Simon Brooke
Chief Technical Officer, Scaffie Ltd.
They don't even have the word mark on PCI (Score:3, Insightful)
They're within their rights in asking that this guy pull the use of their logo, but beyond that, both they and he are overreacting.
Click here to search trademarks and verify this. [uspto.gov]
Re:*ci is on the way out (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Trademark law (Score:3, Insightful)
Bruce
Re:Contacts (Score:5, Informative)
To pci-sig list members and other individuals in the blind-cc to this message.
I am receiving quite a few e-mails about the situation with Jim Boemler's web site, which he has felt compelled to take down. I wasn't aware of this situation until the first of these e-mails arrived, and having looked into it I think the situation is as outrageous as obviously many of you do.
However, you should all be aware that neither I personally, or my company ZNYX Networks has anything to do with this situation. ZNYX Networks is not currently a member of the PCI SIG. We allowed our membership to lapse a number of years ago since it was obvious we were not going to be active in any standards setting efforts. As for me or any employee of ZNYX Networks, we are not now or ever have been an official of the SIG. If you read Mr. Boemler's web page more carefully, you will note that he does not list me as anything other than a possible contact, since he mentions he is not clear who should be contacted, other than the "shark" that is doing the legal work.
We have e-mailed Mr. Boemler (and cc'ed this message) to clarify our position, and I will offer any aid I can.
To clarify our position, we run the pci-sig mailing list as a general service to the community as a whole the same way Jim Boemler does (did) his web site. Back in 1992-3 when we first started, there were much fewer people around who could set up a mailing list so we did it. As with Mr. Boemler, we don't get paid for it, and we have offered to turn the work over to the SIG since we felt that it is more properly a SIG service, but so far there has been no positive reply. Now I am wondering if I am going
to get a present in the mail like Jim did! (I really don't think that
will be the case, since we don't do a web page, but the parallel is
evident.)
To any REAL PCI-SIG officials: would you care to post a comment?
Alan Deikman
ZNYX Networks, Inc.