I believe it is called "Bud", "Bud Light", etc., while the Czech company uses the "Budweiser" name.

And even that was contentious.

In the US, trademarks only extend as far as someone might be confused by their use. It's not a hard black and white line, but you can use "Word" if you wanted to, in an unrelated industry from Microsoft's, provided that nobody thought that customers might be confused and think that your product was, or was in some way related to, Microsoft's. (Obviously since Microsoft is such a big company and does so much stuff, this might be harder than if they were purely in the word processing business.)

A good example is Apple Records vs Apple Computer Corp. There was a lot of argument that went back and forth as to whether Apple Computers might be confused with Apple Records -- which seemed ridiculous at the time, because why would Apple Computer ever get into the music business? So they worked it out and came to a settlement to stay out of each other's turf. That happens very frequently. (It got interesting when Apple-the-computer-company decided to get into the music business; my understanding is that they made Apple Records an offer they couldn't refuse.)

And given how ubiquitous Microsoft's products are -- love them or hate them -- the breadth of their trademarks are probably not unreasonable. A no-name company ought not be able to assert a trademark with any similar breadth, because there's so little chance of confusion.

Well they are registered in the .com TLD, which is basically United States namespace, so it would make sense that US trademark law would apply at least in terms of the domain name. I doubt some European company would be able to convince a US court to order Verisign to turn over the domain to them.

So at worst, I would think that Pinterest could continue to operate under the "Pinterest.com" domain name; the challenge would be whether they want to advertise in the European market, which might be prohibited without changing their name.

Replying to undo moderation mouso.

There are new "arbitrary code execution" zero-days every week so this explanation doesn't cut it.

Just my thought. If it was possible to flash BIOS remotely via malware it would have been reported and we'd see a flood of BIOS updates.

Sorry, I wasn't sure and selected the wrong option without looking it up. English is my third language.

Or rape.

A woman's eggs were produced when she was a fetus, that's why you have epigenetic effects straight from the grandmother (who's nutrition determines the environment in the womb.)

There are some very good reasons for the GPL. I like it.

Adblocking and blackholing DNS names seems to work quite well. It's really rare for me to see an ad.

Yes it is a Linux issue - specifically that ZFS licensing is incompatible with the GPL so ZFS can't be integrated into the kernel.

I run btrfs on RAID6 (with weekly scrubbing) on a system with ECC RAM. That should reduce the incidence of bit rot to a negligeable level.

If it was integrated into the Linux kernel I'd use it. But with a chance that the next kernel update will make my FS driver unusable I won't touch it with a long pole.

So that leaves btrfs.

Yes! I want a FSM monument next to them.