From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, Joseph Fenn wrote:
|I wonder if I had a model T ford in the garage still in working
|condition if I could change its name to mine and not get sued
|by Ford!!1

Aren't you confusing trademarks with copyrights? Surely you know
how to distinguish between them, don't you?

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in news:k2gllv2z09m.fsf@legolas.mdh.se:

I'm trying to access http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corpnews.asp
but get "server too busy" from their IIS:

"The request cannot be processed at this time. The amount
of traffic exceeds the Web site's configured capacity."

Did anyone /. Tulip's website, or what?

I doubt that hackers looking to destroy 6000 web servers would
bother inserting quite on-topic stuff on the sites. Either Tulip
went down by load, or got so many responses from Commodore users
that they brought the page down and will reconsider what to do.

A little thought, eh ? Calling to the International Network of Commodore
users (INC users), we shall email them and visit their sites to get their attention. :-)

Eh? I think this will get there attention. Guess it is all part of a
process to get Tulip to listen. I love to see what they will say on there website when it gets back up. I think they just got our attention and we certainly got theirs.





--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On 13 Jul 2003 21:37:09 +0200, Anders Carlsson
<anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote:

Did anyone /. Tulip's website, or what?

Actually I think that happened. Once people stated the site couldn't
be reached I went to the Slashdot site and lo and behold someone
posted the Tulip news there hence the /. effect strikes again.


Jason

--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jkr7@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Anders Carlsson" <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in message news:k2gllv2z09m.fsf@legolas.mdh.se...

Did anyone /. Tulip's website, or what?

http://slashdot.org/articles/03/07/13/043234.shtml?tid=162&tid=99

--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Anders Carlsson:

Isn't there already some C64 emulator for mobile units by the way?

At least Frodo is ported to several EPOC/SymbianOS devices (such as recent Nokia and Sony Ericsson phones, and the older Psion handhelds).

--
\\//
Peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/

I do not read or respond to mail with HTML attachments.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Riccardo Rubini wrote:

It could also be that Tulip makes an offer to the VICE team and actually
buys the exclusive of the product, closing the source and asking everybody and everywhere to remove any previous release.

That's not possible. VICE has been released under the GNU GPL so far,
and that license cannot be rectracted. VICE, at least up to the current version, will always remain GPLed free software.

Even making future versions of VICE closed source would be difficult. Derivative works of software received under the GPL must be GPLed as
well. The only way to do it would be for *each contributor* to VICE,
past and present, to give another, non-GPL, license to Tulip. And of
course, even then others could continue to develop open source VICE.

This has happened already to
some other piece of software, formerly public domain or freeware and thereafter sold as a commercial product.

Choose your words with care. Anything put into the public domain cannot
be taken away. Of course, anyone is free to take something from the
public domain, modify it, and sell the modified (or even unmodified)
version under any license they like. But they cannot stop others from
using and distributing the public domain content.

"Freeware", OTOH, is a rather undefined term. What can and what cannot
be done depends on the actual license under which the product was
distributed.

Regards,
Michael
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Riccardo Rubini wrote:

Now, Rick, straight from your heart : do you seriously believe Tulip's executive is aware of the C-One ?

I bet a Jack Tramiel's autographed pint of Chuck Peddle's sweat Tulip knows absolutely NOTHING about the existence of the C-One. And thank God for that, they might actually consider about suing poor Jeri or Jens for that
devilish, unofficial product or force them to resell it with anything but
the original Pong firmware! :-)

You just lost. Jens wrote on the C-One mailing list yesterday:

| That's right - the name has been changed to C-One for two reasons:
|
| - talks with Tulip ended before they really started. Communication was
| "ineffective", that's all I want to say about it.

and, in another mail:

| I'm eagerly awaiting their [Ironstone Partners'] answer to the eMail
| I've sent them yesterday.

Now, please send me that pint... ;-)

Regards,
Michael
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Michael J. Schülke wrote:

I bet a Jack Tramiel's autographed pint of Chuck Peddle's sweat
Tulip knows absolutely NOTHING about the existence of the C-One. And
thank God for that, they might actually consider about suing poor
Jeri or Jens for that devilish, unofficial product or force them to
resell it with anything but the original Pong firmware! :-)

You just lost. Jens wrote on the C-One mailing list yesterday:

aha. There was a slight suspect growing in me somebody really dared to let Tulip know, although I thought the attempt was Rick's or Matthew's...That's
why I didn't bet a beer :-)

That's right - the name has been changed to C-One for two reasons:

- talks with Tulip ended before they really started. Communication
was "ineffective", that's all I want to say about it.

I thought talks weren't needed to understand they could have not sold the computer as the "Commodore One", since nor Jens nor Jeri own the brand name. You don't need to ask Tulip to understand it. But they even talked to
Tulip. Although the fact the project was immediately canned doesn't surprise
me at all.

I'm eagerly awaiting their [Ironstone Partners'] answer to the eMail
I've sent them yesterday.

Ironstone will take care of the new official portal, I believe, they seem focused only on the software side. When PC manufacturing comes, Tulip has to
be involved, and they already canned the project. It's true that pushing the C-One _through_ Ironstone could have slightly different results, but I
wouldn't hold my breath.

Now, please send me that pint... ;-)

If you're so eager to receive a pint of sweat, I think I'll make your day adding a can of Leo Tramiel's dandruff :-)

Riccardo




--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

wildstar wrote:

J. Robertson <jkr7@juno.com> wrote in news:8t64hvcf92n3gdpls5ruaio2p820q3je7d@4ax.com:

Actually I think that happened. Once people stated the site couldn't
be reached I went to the Slashdot site and lo and behold someone
posted the Tulip news there hence the /. effect strikes again.

Behold they did. I think it is a combination of efforts. Slashdot and Commodore users. Boy did they get attention.

Tulip could try every trick in the book, and benefit from help of others, although I definitely doubt their counters will ever reach the 6th million visitor <g>

Riccardo


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Michael J. Schülke wrote:
|Riccardo Rubini wrote:
|

It could also be that Tulip makes an offer to the VICE team and actually buys the exclusive of the product, closing the source and asking everybody and everywhere to remove any previous release.

|
|That's not possible. VICE has been released under the GNU GPL so far,
|and that license cannot be rectracted.
Unlike leases, licenses are generally, on the part of the licensor,
revocable at will.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, [ISO-8859-15] Michael J. Schülke wrote:
|You just lost. Jens wrote on the C-One mailing list yesterday:
|
|| That's right - the name has been changed to C-One for two reasons:
||
|| - talks with Tulip ended before they really started. Communication was
|| "ineffective", that's all I want to say about it.
When is the name of the mailing list going to be changed?
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Riccardo Rubini" <rrubini@tmicha.net> writes:

commercially speaking there is Pocket C64, costs something like 7$.

So that is one of the obvious targets for Tulip/Irongate to shut down.

--
Anders Carlsson
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

A C1 PDA could be SOOOOO COOOL!!!
Realistically, if some one with some resources took on the project, it there any reason why a single chip Commodore 64 could not be made today?

Even with something like the IDE64 could be put on chip so that all that was needed to add storage was a compact flash adapter. Or what the hell,
seperate logic for an IDE adapter that could fake a 1541 style drive could
be reworked and put on a new Commodore chip.

One of those small joy-balls like found on many cell phones today, and a Blackbery style keyboard... I bet you would have a resonably low cost,
powerful PDA. Since there is no need to track a cursor on a screen, and the screen is a simple 16 color one, it could be very cheap to make as well.

Imagine a the under $50 PDA that could use all the old commodore software.

"wildstar" <wildstar128@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:Xns93B680632B766wildstar128hotmailco@216.168.3.44...

"Riccardo Rubini" <rrubini@tmicha.net> wrote in

news:_pVPa.34994$qa5.781639

@news2.tin.it:

Matthew Montchalin wrote:

A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
it.

Give a look :

http://www.amstrad.com/emailer_plus.html

Is this what you had in mind, in a Commodore 64 fashion ? :-)

Riccardo

Can you imagine a Tulip licensing the C-One and marketing it ?
In a strategic partnership, it might be of interest if they partner with
Jen and Jeri and Tulip put the units together under the Commodore brand
name. This may even lead to financial backing for development of C-One laptops and PDAs.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307140334140.25797-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, [ISO-8859-15] Michael J. Schülke wrote:
|You just lost. Jens wrote on the C-One mailing list yesterday:
|
|| That's right - the name has been changed to C-One for two reasons:
||
|| - talks with Tulip ended before they really started. Communication was
|| "ineffective", that's all I want to say about it.

When is the name of the mailing list going to be changed?

Mail Lists can not be attacked. Mail Lists are not trademark violation.
They can't shut down mail lists. Mail Lists are not commercial in any way. Just a method of users communicating about a subject.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

jledger@cyberstreet.com (Jeff Ledger) wrote in news:706f6242.0307140604.6c0ff5e0@posting.google.com:

Guys, you'd be advised to get your copies of everything you
want NOW... It looks like we better start using something
other than the words, "Commodore" or "Commodore 64" on our
websites. A sad day for C*mmodore hobbiests worldwide.

I for one do not want to be associated with this "Tulip"
company. A C*mmodore emulator? You've got to be joking!

I've got an idea... Let's get some people together on this,
and register the trademark "C64" and "CBM" -- Anyone know
why this wouldn't work? I'd put some money on this one.

Jeff

Let's not base final decisions on speculations. Has anyone received
responses from Tulip Computers. A company has all the legal power to
change there approach.

I am sure that they are looking over these email and will take some
thought here. Tulip may decide to back off us a little. Maybe target the
few sites that are using the trademarks as a corporate trademark. We have
not used it in that manner.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Let's not base final decisions on speculations. Has anyone received responses from Tulip Computers. A company has all the legal power to
change there approach.

Sorry, I tend to get a jumpy when I see press releases that
read like the typical junk from the RIAA, Microsft, etc.

Let's cross our fingers.

Jeff
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Pheuque" <phueque@antisocial.com> wrote in news:USyQa.16331$QD2.2562057@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net:

A C1 PDA could be SOOOOO COOOL!!!
Realistically, if some one with some resources took on the project, it
there any reason why a single chip Commodore 64 could not be made
today?

Even with something like the IDE64 could be put on chip so that all
that was needed to add storage was a compact flash adapter. Or what
the hell, seperate logic for an IDE adapter that could fake a 1541
style drive could be reworked and put on a new Commodore chip.

One of those small joy-balls like found on many cell phones today, and
a Blackbery style keyboard... I bet you would have a resonably low
cost, powerful PDA. Since there is no need to track a cursor on a
screen, and the screen is a simple 16 color one, it could be very
cheap to make as well.

Imagine a the under $50 PDA that could use all the old commodore
software.

Actually it would be possible to make a C-One with one chip. All we may
need is at minimum is a 416 pin FPGA with 130K LE. (Yes, it must have the
same number of GPIO lines as what the two FPGAs currently used and all. Anyway, I think it would be highly interesting to see. "Nano-PCI" - a specially designed micronized PCI compatible slot which would carry all
the pin signals of the PCI slot on a C-One in much smaller slot. What
would also be possible is implement a micronized CPU slot carrying a RISC
CPU like that found on a GB-Advance or even a 44 pin TSOP packaged 65c816 which is fully capable of being done by WDC. I like the idea for both
personal and commercial reasons. New stylish casing with that famed C=
logo and be "LEGAL" too.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in |news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307140334140.25797-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:
|

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, [ISO-8859-15] Michael J. Schülke wrote:
|You just lost. Jens wrote on the C-One mailing list yesterday:
|
|| That's right - the name has been changed to C-One for two reasons:
||
|| - talks with Tulip ended before they really started. Communication was |>|| "ineffective", that's all I want to say about it.

When is the name of the mailing list going to be changed?

|
|Mail Lists can not be attacked.
What do you mean when you use the word 'attacked' ??
|Mail Lists are not trademark violation.
The word 'Commodore' is being used by Yahoo.com. It is being associated
with the word 'Yahoo' in Yahoogroups. It is evidence that the trademark
has been diluted, and may have entered the public domain.
|They can't shut down mail lists.
Most Commodore 'websites' (and BBSes, where they still exist) will
point out how Yahoo has incorporated the word 'Commodore' in their
Yahoogroups list.
|Mail Lists are not commercial in any way.
What makes you think that?
|Just a method of users communicating about a subject.
And Jeri Ellsworth has indicated that she 'owns' the CommodoreOne
mailing list, apparently without having to ask Tulip for permission
first.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Riccardo Rubini wrote:
|Anders Carlsson wrote:

"Riccardo Rubini" <rrubini@tmicha.net> writes:

commercially speaking there is Pocket C64, costs something like 7$.

So that is one of the obvious targets for Tulip/Irongate to shut down.

|
|Maybe they will simply buy the rights and proceed with their own
|development. If I were in their shoes, that's what I would do.

This would be best for everyone, it seems.

|It costs less than developing the emulator from scratch.

Yes.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307141902580.27346-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

What do you mean when you use the word 'attacked' ??

Shut Downed, Removed, Terminated, Targeted. Take your pick.

|Mail Lists are not trademark violation.

The word 'Commodore' is being used by Yahoo.com. It is being
associated with the word 'Yahoo' in Yahoogroups. It is evidence that
the trademark has been diluted, and may have entered the public
domain.

The word 'Commodore' can not be trademarked but the logo itself and the
fonted letters and all can be. The blue text in the exact font form can
be trademarked and the "Chicken Head" symbol can be. The word itself can
not be under any trademark laws. I am sure Tulip understands that. They
are talking about commercial sites that are commercially using the name "Commodore 64" and the word Commodore in the form of the blue fonted
letters "commodore" that is all in lower case. There are other companies
that uses the word 'commodore' but are in no way related and have been
around even when Commodore Business Machines was around like back in the
1970s ans 1980s. It is not exactly the word but the market and often
usage of the Commodore logo. Remember the Commodore Logo doesn't have the
be Blue & Red. It was Black and it was also in White. It is the shape as
well.

Mail lists are not jurisdiction of trademark infringement and it is not commercial.

|They can't shut down mail lists.

Most Commodore 'websites' (and BBSes, where they still exist) will
point out how Yahoo has incorporated the word 'Commodore' in their Yahoogroups list.

To cover Commodore discussion. It is fan mail list. This is not in the
target nor dilute the use as it is not commercial uses which is what
violates trademark laws. It is commercial use of trademarks that you do
not own, that gets you in trouble.

|Mail Lists are not commercial in any way.

What makes you think that?

They are not. They are not sales platform nor are they used for that. It
would be a violation of the terms of agreement. It is a discussion
platform.

|Just a method of users communicating about a subject.

And Jeri Ellsworth has indicated that she 'owns' the CommodoreOne
mailing list, apparently without having to ask Tulip for permission
first.

Actually she is just a moderator. Mail Lists have nothing to do with
this. Tulip will not shut down mail lists as this is whole different
matters.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in |news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307141902580.27346-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:
|
|

What do you mean when you use the word 'attacked' ??

|
|Shut Downed, Removed, Terminated, Targeted. Take your pick.

Compelled to pay a licensing fee (and legal fees, and court costs) makes
a lot more sense.

|Mail Lists are not trademark violation.

The word 'Commodore' is being used by Yahoo.com. It is being
associated with the word 'Yahoo' in Yahoogroups. It is evidence that
the trademark has been diluted, and may have entered the public
domain.

|
|The word 'Commodore' can not be trademarked

Why do you think that?

|but the logo itself and the fonted letters and all can be.

Trademarks are usually employed for identification purposes. To this
end, you can slap a trademark on a product. Why, you can even refer
to an entire business by means of its trademark. To add to your
undoubtedly great astonishment, 'Microsoft' is a trademark, and it
is a fairly strong one at that.

|The blue text in the exact font form can be trademarked and the
|"Chicken Head" symbol can be. The word itself can not be under any
|trademark laws.

Hey, think about what you are saying here, why don't you? Although
it may be true that a single word (in isolation) may not be protected
under the COPYRIGHT laws, you are very much mistaken if you think that
a business cannot employ a single word as its tradename, or employ a
single word to describe one of its products. McNuggets, for instance,
is a word that is protected by the trademark laws, just as much as
the company that manufactures it, McDonald's.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Saw this mentioned on amiga.org then went to investigate it for
myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link: http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corp_article.asp?nid=109, also
www.commodore.net):

Here's the article for those without broswer capability (Matthew):

Tulip also states in article they're not happy with several sites who commercialy use the Commodore name and logo.

***

Global re-launch of COMMODORE by TULIP COMPUTERS N.V. and IRONSTONE
PARTNERS LIMITED

Amersfoort, July 11, 2003

Today Tulip Computers NV (Tulip) and Ironstone Partners Ltd.
(Ironstone) signed a licence agreement for a partnership, which is a
major step in the global re-launch of the Commodore brand name.

Tulip will receive a license fee for all Commodore C64 products
delivered by Ironstone, installed on all computer brands using the
Microsoft or any other operating system and all Commodore 64 branded
products. In addition, Tulip will receive a license fee over the
revenue from software downloads, subscriptions and advertising.

Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million loyal
Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world. This community is
currently spread over hundreds of unofficial websites. The community
craves acknowledgement and authenticity from the true Commodore C64
brand. Tulip is the owner of the brand name Commodore. Through this
partnership Tulip grants to Ironstone the exclusive rights to exploit
the official Commodore C64 web-portal and use of the Commodore 64
brand name.

Ironstone and Tulip invite the Commodore community to join the
official Commodore C64 web-portal. Currently there are about 300
commercial websites that use the name Commodore or Commodore 64
without having a license from Tulip. Tulip will not allow unauthorised
use of the Commodore brand.

In this partnership, Ironstone will create the official Commodore C64
games and community portal designed to focus and harness the power of
the Commodore C64 user base and to efficiently provide the services
required by these individuals for a fee. The founders of Ironstone are experienced and successful, in previous similar projects Ironstone
achieved a subscriber to pay subscriber conversion rate that was
unparalleled in the Internet space.

The main objective of the Ironstone official C64 portal is to unite
this massive global fan base of passionate enthusiasts. Through its
web portal, Ironstone will market the official C64 emulator in various
software and hardware formats. The games offered by the Ironstone
web-portal will include the famous classic C64 games as well as
exciting new games and will also sell its Commodore-branded products
through the site.

Tulip will get full access to the estimated 6 million users and will
also sell its Commodore branded products through this portal. Tulip
will introduce, the upcoming months, new hardware products under the
Commodore brand name, being able to use the C64 emulator.

According to Bjorn Bruggeman, Brand Manager Commodore: Through
strategic partnerships we're creating a web of Commodore partner
companies. Each partner, or licensee, is selected on his unique
expertise and will focus on a specific market segment within the
Commodore strategy. The synergy advantages are huge. The license
agreement with Ironstone is an important step in this process and will
enable Tulip to enter a complete new era with almost unlimited
e-commerce opportunities.

Darren Melbourne, Creative Director, Ironstone Partners commented, “
The license deal with Tulip is a huge breakthrough for the millions of
C64 enthusiasts and retro gamers around the world who are still loyal
to this incredible games system. Ironstone is committed to bringing
this technology and games library back to prominence on every platform available to us.

Commodore C64 facts and figures

* The C64 is the biggest selling home computer in world history.
* The C64 has an unparalleled heritage as a groundbreaking games and
home use PC.
* The C64’s role in the evolution of the modern games industry was
incredible powerful and the echoes of its influence still reverberate
through the industry today.
* Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million
loyal Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world.
* A countless number of hobbyists and Commodore enthusiast have kept
the community alive. An Internet search on Commodore is still good for
about 50,000 hits.
* Currently there are about 300 commercial websites that use the name
Commodore or Commodore 64.
* Over 6000 games have been created for the C64.
* The brand awareness of the Commodore logo is still one of highest in
the industry.

About Tulip Computers

Tulip Computers (Tulip) is a European A-brand computer manufacturer
and has grown to become an internationally renown, market leading
company. Being founded in 1979, Tulip has been active in the computer
industry for more than 20 years and is one of the most experienced
computer manufacturers in the world. Indeed, since 1981, Tulip has
developed its own computers, pioneered by its own Research &
Development department in dedicated Tulip manufacturing plants.

Tulip head-office is located in Amersfoort (the Netherlands), as is
the helpdesk, technical department and notebook production line. The
Tulip head-office is also responsible for the General Management,
Research & Development and Marketing & Communication on world wide
level. Tulip owns sales offices in the Netherlands, Germany and Spain.
Besides these offices, Tulip works closely together with the in 2002
privatised Tulip sales offices in the Benelux, France, Italy and the
UK. In addition, Tulip has joint ventures with distributors in
countries where it does not have its own sales offices.

Tulip offers a comprehensive product range, which is ideally suited to
meet the requirements of the professional, educational, medical, SME
and retail markets. Tulip product lines include a wide range of
servers, desktops, notebooks under brand name Tulip and communication
products under brand names Dynalink and Conceptronic. Tulip has
acquired Commodore in 1997. With Commodore, Tulip owns a strong brand
name that includes a wide range of multi media products and mobile
computing. The emphasis in this consumer oriented product line is on
retail sales. In addition, other Commodore ICT products are marketed
under the Commodore brand by a number of licencees.

Tulip Computers is an international IT supplier that integrates
servers, deskbound computers, notebooks and communication products in
a total solution for the IT user. Tulip's shares have been traded on
the Euronext stock exchange since 1984.

About Ironstone Partners

Ironstone Partners Ltd is a commercial vehicle created and funded by a
number of individuals with a combined experience of over 100 years in
the global games and media industries. With Offices in the UK and
Canada, Ironstone has been created to pursue strategic and speculative
games opportunities outside the remit of the current focus of the
large games industry companies.

Ironstone Partners owns an extensive portfolio of games I.P.R. and is
always willing to discuss interesting propositions in the games and
media space.

For further information please contact Danielle Woodyatt or Kat Osman
at Lunch PR on 020 7633 0633 or email (firstname)@lunchpr.com

If you wish to contact Ironstone Partners please send an email to info@ironstonepartners.com

More information

Tulip Computers International B.V.
P.O. Box 150
3800 AD Amersfoort
The Netherlands
T +31 (0)33 4549300
F +31 (0)33 4549400
E press@tulip.com

Jason

--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jkr7@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

J. Robertson wrote:

Global re-launch of COMMODORE by TULIP COMPUTERS N.V. and IRONSTONE
PARTNERS LIMITED

So, their plan is to sell c64 emulators and old games, and to probably
try and shut down web sites that use "their" IP. Pardon me if I'm not thrilled..

--
Jason

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 02:08:16 GMT, Jason Petersen <borg64@hotmail.com>
wrote:

J. Robertson wrote:

Global re-launch of COMMODORE by TULIP COMPUTERS N.V. and IRONSTONE
PARTNERS LIMITED

So, their plan is to sell c64 emulators and old games, and to probably
try and shut down web sites that use "their" IP. Pardon me if I'm not >thrilled..

Exactly. I'm not thrilled for the same reason either.


Jason

--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jkr7@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm



"J. Robertson" wrote:

Saw this mentioned on amiga.org then went to investigate it for
myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link: http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corp_article.asp?nid=109, also www.commodore.net):

Here's the article for those without broswer capability (Matthew):

Tulip also states in article they're not happy with several sites who commercialy use the Commodore name and logo.

***

Global re-launch of COMMODORE by TULIP COMPUTERS N.V. and IRONSTONE
PARTNERS LIMITED

Let me know when they start making replacement SID chips - I can always
use some of those. And if they don't know how to produce SIDs, then they aren't really Commodore, no matter what the lawyers say.
-Ron


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"J. Robertson" <jkr7@juno.com> wrote in message news:3gpugvcftta9sks1glg05o4sokl9e408o1@4ax.com...

Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million loyal Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world.

I'd like to see where they got this number from.

The community
craves acknowledgement and authenticity from the true Commodore C64
brand.

Not really. We just want to be kept aware of the legalities surrounding the
64 so that we can pursue our hobby without large corps getting in our way.

Tulip is the owner of the brand name Commodore. Through this
partnership Tulip grants to Ironstone the exclusive rights to exploit
the official Commodore C64 web-portal and use of the Commodore 64
brand name.

The Commodore 64 brand hasn't been protected/enforced in years. IIRC, US trademark law requires you to pursue retaining exclusive use, etc, or else
your trademark becomes defunct. Does international law or the Netherland's
law have the same stipulation?

Ironstone and Tulip invite the Commodore community to join the
official Commodore C64 web-portal. Currently there are about 300
commercial websites that use the name Commodore or Commodore 64
without having a license from Tulip. Tulip will not allow unauthorised
use of the Commodore brand.

So Tulip seeks to tear down the infrastructure of those who contribute the
most to the C64 community. Obviously, anybody who gets a notification from Tulip regarding this will not be peachy-keen friends with Tulip. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the ramifications of that action
in a niche market such as ours will be.

In this partnership, Ironstone will create the official Commodore C64
games and community portal designed to focus and harness the power of
the Commodore C64 user base and to efficiently provide the services
required by these individuals for a fee. The founders of Ironstone are experienced and successful, in previous similar projects Ironstone
achieved a subscriber to pay subscriber conversion rate that was
unparalleled in the Internet space.

There's a decent portion of C64 users that stick with it because it's what
they have, and they don't have much cash to spend on other fancy new
computers. I doubt they can squeeze a lot out of us. Heck, $150-300 for computer upgrade equipment isn't that bad of a price and offers a C64 a far better price/performance ratio than a $150-300 PC upgrade, and that's the
range that CMD was selling in. There's still tons of C64 users out there without anything more than a joystick and a 1541.

The main objective of the Ironstone official C64 portal is to unite
this massive global fan base of passionate enthusiasts.

Blah blah blah. The main objective of any company is to make money. Why do business try to disguise this in a thin veneer of "let us help you out of
the goodness of our heart"?

Through its
web portal, Ironstone will market the official C64 emulator in various software and hardware formats.

Time to get the disassemblers out and see if their emulator uses VICE source code without releasing source.

Tulip
will introduce, the upcoming months, new hardware products under the Commodore brand name, being able to use the C64 emulator.

Yay! More Web.it's! :)

The synergy advantages are huge. The license
agreement with Ironstone is an important step in this process and will
enable Tulip to enter a complete new era with almost unlimited
e-commerce opportunities.

I can feel the paradigm shifting already!


You know, there's nothing wrong with making money. People need it to live
in our society, and businesses need it to operate. But all this smoke and mirrors about brand loyalty and community gathering seems to be just a bunch
of plastic smiles put up by somebody trying to justify the expense of purchasing a brand name that hasn't gained them much. This does not go over well with a niche market that's loyal to a defunct brand. *sigh*

--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, J. Robertson wrote:
|Amersfoort, July 11, 2003

Amersfoort? Tsk! About as valid as Peking, China.

|Today Tulip Computers NV (Tulip) and Ironstone Partners Ltd.
|(Ironstone) signed a licence agreement for a partnership,

Tsk. They surely know how to file articles of partnership in a
state recognizing that sort of thing if they really want to be
considered a 'partnership.'

|which is a major step in the global re-launch of the Commodore brand
|name.

As though I wanted to buy a PC compatible just to get a Tulip
brand computer.

|Tulip will receive a license fee for all Commodore C64 products
|delivered by Ironstone,

Never heard of them. Is Ironstone going to sell them the Brooklyn
Bridge, too?

|installed on all computer brands using the Microsoft or any other
|operating system and all Commodore 64 branded products. In addition,
|Tulip will receive a license fee over the revenue from software
|downloads, subscriptions and advertising.

Rest assured that Tulip guarantees a refund to customers that
mistakenly buy their PC compatibles, when they really wanted
to buy a bona fide Commodore system.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 19:42:20 -0700, Kate Slaminko
<krslam@netscape.net> wrote:

Let me know when they start making replacement SID chips - I can always
use some of those. And if they don't know how to produce SIDs, then they >aren't really Commodore, no matter what the lawyers say.

Don't hold your breath over it. ;-)


Jason

--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jkr7@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"J. Robertson" <jkr7@juno.com> wrote in message news:3gpugvcftta9sks1glg05o4sokl9e408o1@4ax.com...

Saw this mentioned on amiga.org then went to investigate it for
myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link: http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corp_article.asp?nid=109, also www.commodore.net):

Tulip also states in article they're not happy with several sites who commercialy use the Commodore name and logo.

[snip]

As long as the brand name and logo is not used to identify the site, there shouldn't be too much trouble. Besides, they would be unwise to alienate the C64 community and incur a backlash that would be detrimental to their exploitation of this (very) niche market.

I guess that they intend to push portable consumer devices (handheld
computers, etc) that feature small screens that the low-res C64 games would
run nicely on. There are many classics (Boulderdash comes to mind) that
would be wonderful for mobile gaming.

The fact that Commodore dumped us in the early 1990's before their demise
has meant that C64 users have not relied on an "official" Commodore presence for more than a decade. Ironstone will have to be aware of this if they wish
to work with us.

But chances are that Ironstone doesn't give a toss about us C64 hobbyists - they simply want to capture the emulator/mobile computing market with a
ready source of classic games that require a minimum of computing resources
and development.

I'm a bit cynical about their plans to support the C64 community though. The clamp-down on unauthorised download sites is necessary to secure the
viability of the software they will licence and sell. Any plans to actually support C64 users may just be an attempt to allay the fears of a community
they probably don't really want or need.

But, I'm willing to take a chance with them since they might be willing to place a large wad of cash in the hands of Commodore 64 developers to create
new products "tuned" to whatever platform they will ultimately run on. As a result, I'll be one of the first to stick my hand out. :-) Hey, stop
pushing back there - Get in line!


Marc Walters


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Kate Slaminko wrote:

Let me know when they start making replacement SID chips - I can
always use some of those. And if they don't know how to produce
SIDs, then they aren't really Commodore, no matter what the lawyers
say. -Ron

I guess it's impossible, as Gateway allegedly owns the patents behind the
SID technology. Tulip owns only the brand name "Commodore".

Riccardo


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

You know, there's nothing wrong with making money. People need it to live
in our society, and businesses need it to operate. But all this smoke and mirrors about brand loyalty and community gathering seems to be just a

bunch

of plastic smiles put up by somebody trying to justify the expense of purchasing a brand name that hasn't gained them much. This does not go

over

well with a niche market that's loyal to a defunct brand. *sigh*

Fully agreed: there's a discussion also going on (and a contact email
address
to spam) at

http://www.lemon64.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8412

It's a chilling prospect based on Dilbert numbers and a large amount
of commercial cynicism.

Chris


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

<<<
But chances are that Ironstone doesn't give a toss about us C64 hobbyists - they simply want to capture the emulator/mobile computing market with a
ready source of classic games that require a minimum of computing resources
and development.

Which they don't own, I might add. They seem to be working under the
assumption
that because they own the Commodore name, they own all the games too, like Nintendo.
Idiots.

Anyway, if they try and sell C64 games commercially I'm going to hit them
hard
with a bill for the rights to the music, backed up by commercial copyright organisations.

Chris


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"c64audio" <chris@c64audioREMOVETHIS.com> writes:

Anyway, if they try and sell C64 games commercially I'm going to
hit them hard with a bill for the rights to the music, backed up
by commercial copyright organisations.

I would believe Tulip/Ironstone will seek licenses before trying
to commercially redistribute the same stuff they're willing to try
to prevent pirate distribution of. Most of the companies connected
to IDSA will probably be difficult to convince about the profits to
make the games available (again).

Roughly how many of the companies who denied World of Spectrum
redistribution have made their games available to Amstrad's device?
The biggest houses are the same for C64 and Speccy, so it could be
a good estimate.

--
Anders Carlsson
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

wildstar wrote:

I already sent an email to them. It will likely take a week or two to
get a response as it seems to go through a who entire fucking
executive board meeting session before responding back. I told them
that their trademark rights don't mean shit in the US until they
produce sell/market with that trademark into the US. Until them it is
almost a 10 year old defunct trademark.

Rick, I admit I have no valuable knowledge about US federal law, but,
anyway, there is some consistence that eludes me in your reasoning.

Now, regarding the Commodore brand in US...Afair the Commodore trademark has been used in US for quite a bit by a company called Computer Nationals Inc.,
to sell their PC clones. Their Commodore page, which has always been under construction, btw - was located at http://www.commodore2000.com , until
March of last year, circa, disappearing shortly thereafter forever.

I have personally never understood if Computer Nationals Inc. was using the Commodore brand name on behalf of Tulip for the US market.
It's not clear to me if Tulip owns exlcusive worldwide rights to the
Commodore name, but I tend to assume so. Anyway, the Commodore name and logo have been used in US until last year, so it's not exactly a 10 years old defunct trademark for the American market.

I am willing to contribute money if they were to
provide products that would be contributing to the life-force and
continuum of the Commodore scene.

The note talks about new games to surface along with these official portal. Anyway, I can't see any company investing money into serious Commodore 64 development in the XXIII century. I can't help but deny the possibility that Electronic Arts will develope FIFA 2004 for the C64 after the relaunch.

Speaking of the official software from Tulip, I am personally unsure about
the platform this alleged definitive emulator will run on. We all already
gave for granted it has to be the PC, but I think their target could be different. Modern cellular phones represent an appetible platform, as well
as Pocket PC's or, say, the Sony Playstation series.

Riccardo



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Anders Carlsson wrote:

Roughly how many of the companies who denied World of Spectrum
redistribution have made their games available to Amstrad's device?
The biggest houses are the same for C64 and Speccy, so it could be
a good estimate.

I assume that before you commit such an important relaunch, and decide to invest money in it, you already know your directions and what you're aiming
at. A serious market research had to take place at Tulip before convincing their chairmen to give this project a try and, of course, some distribution agreements with software houses had to be in the talks.

Although I have to say that the alleged 6 million users driven Commodore community reminds me a little of Comical Ali's blurbs :-))

Riccardo


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003, Riccardo Rubini wrote:
|Rick, I admit I have no valuable knowledge about US federal law, but,
|anyway, there is some consistence that eludes me in your reasoning.
|
|Now, regarding the Commodore brand in US...Afair the Commodore trademark has |been used in US for quite a bit by a company called Computer Nationals Inc., |to sell their PC clones.

It is also important to inquire into the extent of their *exclusive*
use of the mark.

|Their Commodore page, which has always been under construction, btw -
|was located at http://www.commodore2000.com ,

It makes a difference where the actual webserver is located.

|until March of last year, circa, disappearing shortly thereafter
|forever.

Lack of continuity of control is a major problem with asserting a right
in a trademark.

|I have personally never understood if Computer Nationals Inc. was using
|the Commodore brand name on behalf of Tulip for the US market.

hmmm

|It's not clear to me if Tulip owns exlcusive worldwide rights to the |Commodore name, but I tend to assume so.

It makes a difference if the public is being served, or if the public
is being harmed. Passing off products that do not execute on 'classic' Commodore computers might be an example of such a harm.

|Anyway, the Commodore name and logo have been used in US until last
|year, so it's not exactly a 10 years old defunct trademark for the
|American market.

You have to show 'exclusive' use of a mark, not just 'activity'
without an attempt to exclude a competitor from using that mark.

I am willing to contribute money if they were to provide products
that would be contributing to the life-force and continuum of the
Commodore scene.

|
|The note talks about new games to surface along with these official
|portal.

hmm

|Anyway, I can't see any company investing money into serious
|Commodore 64 development in the XXIII century.

Not without a special angle, like colorram being a full 8 bits wide,
for instance. And even given that, it doesn't seem like enough, either.

|I can't help but deny the possibility that Electronic Arts will develope
|FIFA 2004 for the C64 after the relaunch.
|
|Speaking of the official software from Tulip, I am personally unsure
|about the platform this alleged definitive emulator will run on. We
|all already gave for granted it has to be the PC, but I think their
|target could be different. Modern cellular phones represent an appetible |platform, as well as Pocket PC's or, say, the Sony Playstation series.

A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
it.


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Marc Walters" <ddmw@hunterlink.net.au> writes:

As long as the brand name and logo is not used to identify the site, there >shouldn't be too much trouble. Besides, they would be unwise to alienate the >C64 community and incur a backlash that would be detrimental to their >exploitation of this (very) niche market.

It would be interesting to see what effect this has on fan sites and other non-profits (like, say, Secret Weapons, for one thing).

I do plan to add an addendum to the Commodore history in the 12th edition
that features this absolute load of swill. If anyone from Tulip has any
brains at all, they'd be reading this group (so they aren't).

But chances are that Ironstone doesn't give a toss about us C64 hobbyists - >they simply want to capture the emulator/mobile computing market with a
ready source of classic games that require a minimum of computing resources >and development.

Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.

I don't think they're going to be particularly benevolent to current
commercial C64 software houses, though. Why should they be? I strongly
doubt they're interested in new development, since most of those programs
are Commodore versions of desktop tools, like browsers, operating systems,
et cetera.

--
Cameron Kaiser * ckaiser@floodgap.com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Cameron Kaiser wrote:

Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.

Why?

The only thing they could possibly object to is the ROM files being
included with the emulator. There are quite a few emulators for other
systems that come without the ROMs, and are thriving nonetheless. People usually find a way to get the ROMs. File sharing services like Kazaa
come to mind.

Besides, everyone who owns a C-64 may legally use that machines ROM
image in an emulator.

Regards,
Michael
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Riccardo Rubini" <rrubini@tmicha.net> wrote in news:r8UPa.34306$qa5.767378@news2.tin.it:

Rick, I admit I have no valuable knowledge about US federal law, but,
anyway, there is some consistence that eludes me in your reasoning.

Now, regarding the Commodore brand in US...Afair the Commodore
trademark has been used in US for quite a bit by a company called
Computer Nationals Inc., to sell their PC clones. Their Commodore
page, which has always been under construction, btw - was located at http://www.commodore2000.com , until March of last year, circa,
disappearing shortly thereafter forever.

I have personally never understood if Computer Nationals Inc. was
using the Commodore brand name on behalf of Tulip for the US market.
It's not clear to me if Tulip owns exlcusive worldwide rights to the Commodore name, but I tend to assume so. Anyway, the Commodore name
and logo have been used in US until last year, so it's not exactly a
10 years old defunct trademark for the American market.

The computer never existed. So it was utterly unused. Tulip may have challenges from CMD + Click Here Software (Maurice's company). If I
recall right, CBM tried to suit CMD a while back but settled out of
court. Tulip will have no right and the CMD products are copyrighted and
the ownership has been transfered to Maurice and thus they can not
legally stop Maurice or even Jeri. First off, I do not get where they
have 300 "Commercial" websites. I guess it is that .com thinggy but as
far as I understand. There isn't even 50 commercial companies. Most of
the rest is a few hardware boys making a few devices and selling them at material cost.

I doubt the Commodore2000 will make any legal grounds. I haven't even
seen a picture of this thing so there really is no grounds that they
have. As far as Tulip goes, this can be very interesting.

The note talks about new games to surface along with these official
portal. Anyway, I can't see any company investing money into serious Commodore 64 development in the XXIII century. I can't help but deny
the possibility that Electronic Arts will develope FIFA 2004 for the
C64 after the relaunch.

Speaking of the official software from Tulip, I am personally unsure
about the platform this alleged definitive emulator will run on. We
all already gave for granted it has to be the PC, but I think their
target could be different. Modern cellular phones represent an
appetible platform, as well as Pocket PC's or, say, the Sony
Playstation series.

Very possible. Most people here don't want a PC or a very micronized PC
like a handheld with an emulator alone. They want stuff for their
computers. What will we do with a micronized "Web.it" with our beloved Commodore computers. They shouldn't be messing up the synergy we have. It would be interesting if there was means of developing handhelds that also
work in conjunction with real Commodore 8-bits. Then there is the C-One
which they may receive a licensce from Jeri sometime in the future and
provide a platform in some strategic partnership. Tulip can help as a
finacial supercell for us. They want strategic partnership with us. This
is want is kind of intriguing.


To be honest, I am investigating this.


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

J. Robertson <jkr7@juno.com> wrote in news:fc40hvgcv7p5tp87or3eh4fg02cjd1nrnn@4ax.com:

No that _isn't_ of any interest to any Commodore fan. Anyone could do
that now you know: PC and emulator. Geez, you weren't here around the
time of the "Commodore 2000" incident but the idea of selling PC's
with an emulator got flamed by people here. In other words no interest
in that whatsoever.

Sorry, my mis-typing here. I told them that it wasn't of any interest.
Sorry for the mistyping here. Forgive me. I did tell them that it was not
of any interest to a Commodore fan.

Yeah, you're definitely the best person to tell them about the
Commodore community/scene... oh, wait, no you're not!

Hey, I seen this scene for quite some time. The key things of interests
to a Commodore fan is things that will allow them to play there favorite Commodore games as well as upgrades to the Commodore 64. BTW: I
personally know more about the Commodore scene than you may realize. I
just don't spend $300 if all I am going to do is the same old thing that
I can spend $25 for. This doesn't mean I wouldn't purchase C= software. I
also see the industry as is and what will be useful in revitalizing any commercial industry and this is a strange gamble but Tulip will certainly
need our support but they really need to connect to us as a whole. We
don't want a dinky miniturized "Web.it". We want a real Commodore 64 that
will continue on the basic technology as perhaps additional features. We
want to use what we already have. We also want to make full use of the internet with the exception of the evil popups. I have made note of
things that most of you have stated over time.

PS: I also made a suggestion for them to check out comp.sys.cbm to talk
with many of the people in the Commodore scene as well as other Commodore
mail lists.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Michael J. Schülke" <news0307@mjschuelke.de> wrote in message news:MPG.197a55f75239fd6998977a@News.CIS.DFN.DE...

The only thing they could possibly object to is the ROM files being
included with the emulator. There are quite a few emulators for other
systems that come without the ROMs, and are thriving nonetheless. People usually find a way to get the ROMs. File sharing services like Kazaa
come to mind.

Tulip doesn't even own any technology IP, only the brand name, so I doubt
they could do anything against the emulators anyway.

--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


Riccardo Rubini wrote ...

Although I have to say that the alleged 6 million users driven Commodore >community reminds me a little of Comical Ali's blurbs :-))

I heard that the former Information Minister was looking for a new job.
Maybe Tulip hired him?? ;-)

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!





--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Sam Gillett wrote:

I have been under the impression that Gateway owns more than the
patents behind Commodore hardware. They also own the copyrights to
the ROM code(s), unless I am mistaken. Of course, Tulip might be
able to either buy or license the rights from Gateway.

I think you are right, Sam. Gateway probably owns everything but the name. I remember I read Gateway owns also some of the Amiga patents as well.

Anyway, I dunno about you, but I would like to point out that my sources are people speaking in the newsgroups and old articles in the news. How reliable
is gossip ? You might say "It depends about who's speaking". True. But sometime's not easy to jump at conclusions. For example, if you read old
Ryan Czerwinsky posts regarding the Commodore 65, you might conclude that 50.000 C65 were actually made, and they all were charcoal grey, ready to
ship within relabeled Amiga 600 boxes and currently hanging somewhere in the
US Tropics. Although, http://www.merlancia.us by Rich Woods came few moons
ago, and here you go, you start to question about the credibility of the
former comp.sys.cbm poster - although it really sounded like a funny tale,
that charcoal thing.

Bottom line is : I feel that "we, the people" don't have much clue about
what has really happened to the Commodore patents and trademark, and who
owns this or that today. I sense we all lost ourselves somewhere in between
the many liquidations and bankrupcies that took place in the past years ( if
I don't recall wrong, even Tulip was close or actually faced bankrupcy years ago ), and all we have are allegations, whose credibility sometimes resides only in the credibility of the poster.

I, from Italy, have no chances to investigate about Commodore US, but
probably in US it's different, since the citizen have access to a lot of
public documentation that, on the contrary, here is covered and secured on behalf of privacy laws. For example, it would be difficult for me to
understand what happened to Commodore Italia. Looking in an old phone book,
I understood that in the year after Commodore US demise, they were still in business as a monitor repair centre, but I do not have access to further information, not easily, I mean.

Somehow, I have the feeling that overall this will do the Commodore
community more harm than good.

We share the same feeling, Sam. No question about it.

Riccardo


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Michael J. Schülke wrote:

Riccardo, you are a nasty person -- sending Matthew an http URL even
though you know his PC crashes every time he tries to access the
web... ;-)

Aw, don't be so hard on me, Michael :-) Put yourself in my shoes : sending
him a copy in A4 format or a brochure via snail mail and waiting for him to receive it, read it and reply me would definitely slow down the hell outta
the whole thread and kill its vibe, it would be like going from speedballs
to milkshakes, you know.

And, ultimately, I have no insurance his postman wouldn't crash either! :-D

Riccardo


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Riccardo Rubini" <rrubini@tmicha.net> wrote in news:VP0Qa.22812$it4.569869@news1.tin.it:

Michael J. Schülke wrote:

Aw, don't be so hard on me, Michael :-) Put yourself in my shoes :
sending him a copy in A4 format or a brochure via snail mail and
waiting for him to receive it, read it and reply me would definitely
slow down the hell outta the whole thread and kill its vibe, it would
be like going from speedballs to milkshakes, you know.

And, ultimately, I have no insurance his postman wouldn't crash
either! :-D

Riccardo

It would be quicker for me to send it to him but I would be too temptive of sending him a special package. (EG)

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Sam Gillett wrote:

Riccardo Rubini wrote ...

Although I have to say that the alleged 6 million users driven
Commodore community reminds me a little of Comical Ali's blurbs :-))

I heard that the former Information Minister was looking for a new
job. Maybe Tulip hired him?? ;-)

Well, this is what I had in mind, although I believe even Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf does not cross certain boundaries of sheer fantasy. "6 million of loyal users" ? Uh?? I mean, is this what Chief Executives use to say when on food poisoning with psychedelic mushrooms? :-D

Riccardo



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Riccardo Rubini" <rrubini@tmicha.net> wrote in news:Yy0Qa.22775$it4.568520@news1.tin.it:

Sam Gillett wrote:

I think you are right, Sam. Gateway probably owns everything but the
name. I remember I read Gateway owns also some of the Amiga patents as
well.

<<< Snip >>>

Bottom line is : I feel that "we, the people" don't have much clue
about what has really happened to the Commodore patents and trademark,
and who owns this or that today. I sense we all lost ourselves
somewhere in between the many liquidations and bankrupcies that took
place in the past years ( if I don't recall wrong, even Tulip was
close or actually faced bankrupcy years ago ), and all we have are allegations, whose credibility sometimes resides only in the
credibility of the poster.

<<< Snip >>>

We share the same feeling, Sam. No question about it.

Riccardo

I have the same feeling too. I am investigating this as this may take
some rather -um interesting turns. I am awaiting a response and will not expect an immediate response. I am also giving them a little information
ans simply told them that we want more stuff in relation to products made
for real Commodore 8 bits. This mobile device stuff may be interesting if
it has some means of being usable with real Commodore computers as well
as the C-One. This will also be something for them to think about. It
would be interesting to us to see a PDA sized C-One as well as a Laptop
size C-One. They can have a role here in my humble opinion. Providing a revitalized commercial market. We really need more info. We need to know
what exactly are they doing.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Riccardo Rubini wrote:

Well, this is what I had in mind, although I believe even Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf does not cross certain boundaries of sheer fantasy. "6 million of loyal users" ? Uh?? I mean, is this what Chief Executives use to say when on food poisoning with psychedelic mushrooms? :-D

Oh, that number is easy to come up with. Take the number of all C64s
sold, subtract the number you have personally seen in the trash, and
conclude that all others are still being used by loyal users. ;-)

Michael
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Michael J. Schülke wrote:

Oh, that number is easy to come up with. Take the number of all C64s
sold, subtract the number you have personally seen in the trash, and
conclude that all others are still being used by loyal users. ;-)

Something I haven't thought before was Tulip actually hiring pendulum
dowsing psychic mediums. All you need to do is feed these new age farts with
a geographic map and, armed with the innate clairvoiance only few human
being have been gifted of, they can determine where are residing all those C64's, how many there are and, on a more specific level, wether you, the
user, are loyal or not, like if you're cheating on Commodore firing a Speccy once in a while.

Yep, this sounds more legit :-D

Riccardo



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> writes:

Somehow, I have the feeling that overall this will do the Commodore
community more harm than good.

So do I. Appropriate badges posted in the CWI web site, Secret Weapons and
CKB.

--
Cameron Kaiser * ckaiser@floodgap.com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

wildstar wrote:

Can you imagine a Tulip licensing the C-One and marketing it ?

No, that would be a smart move :-D

Riccardo


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Michael J. Schülke wrote:
|Riccardo Rubini wrote:

Matthew Montchalin wrote:

A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200 pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
it.

Give a look :

<nonsense snipped>
|Riccardo, you are a nasty person -- sending Matthew an http URL even
|though you know his PC crashes every time he tries to access the web...
|;-)
I pity the fool that has to plug a mouse into his computer.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"c64audio" <chris@c64audioREMOVETHIS.com> wrote in news:beovng$rat$1@titan.btinternet.com:

<<<
But chances are that Ironstone doesn't give a toss about us C64
hobbyists - they simply want to capture the emulator/mobile computing
market with a ready source of classic games that require a minimum of computing resources and development.

Which they don't own, I might add. They seem to be working under the assumption
that because they own the Commodore name, they own all the games too,
like Nintendo.
Idiots.

Anyway, if they try and sell C64 games commercially I'm going to hit
them hard
with a bill for the rights to the music, backed up by commercial
copyright organisations.

Chris

Legally they can not get a single penny as Commodore themselves never
required a license. Most of the third-party software is now public-domain
for quite some time. They were even before 1997. If I recall right, I
believe Escom declared all of the software programs made by Commodore
(that is floppies, cassettes and cartridges) public domain. That is not reversable. That is the way it is. As for the ROMs such as the KERNAL/BASIC/CBM DOS, may be defendable if they purchased them. As for
the use of the trademarks, I assumed they are fully acceptable use as
there is only a few "commercial" developers for the Commodore and none of
them used the trademarks other than the words "Commodore 64/128" in the standard system requirement use and statements that the software or
hardware device is for the Commodore 64 computer. I don't get what they
are exactly trying to do. It is fully acceptable to use the name of the computer in that form. It has been that way since the 1980s. Where have
they been ????

I think they have to make some clear indication and take some thought.
They haven't made one iota effort to communicate with us in the 6 years
of owning there trademarks. They need to make it clear to us and actually communicate to us. I think this is there attempt so it may be in our
interest to communicate back to them and help them understand the
Commodore users. So everyone here should start communicating to Tulip. If
I read this correctly, they want us to communicate to them. So let's help
them not screw things up. That's all.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|"Riccardo Rubini" <rrubini@tmicha.net> wrote in news:_pVPa.34994$qa5.781639 |@news2.tin.it:
|

Matthew Montchalin wrote:

A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
it.

Give a look :

http://www.amstrad.com/emailer_plus.html

Is this what you had in mind, in a Commodore 64 fashion ? :-)

Riccardo

|
|Can you imagine a Tulip licensing the C-One and marketing it ?

Can you imagine Jeri as the licensor, Jens as the agent-mediator,
and Tulip as the licensee?

|In a strategic partnership,

Entering into a joint adventure, whether as equals or unequals, is yet
another kind of business relationship that could be entertained.

|it might be of interest if they partner with Jen and Jeri and Tulip
|put the units together under the Commodore brand name. This may even
|lead to financial backing for development of C-One laptops and PDAs.

A rather weak 'trademark' position for Tulip does not necessarily become
any stronger by admitting strangers into their business affairs.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003, White Flame (aka David Holz) wrote:
|"Michael J. Schülke" <news0307@mjschuelke.de> wrote in message |news:MPG.197a55f75239fd6998977a@News.CIS.DFN.DE...

The only thing they could possibly object to is the ROM files being
included with the emulator. There are quite a few emulators for other systems that come without the ROMs, and are thriving nonetheless. People usually find a way to get the ROMs. File sharing services like Kazaa
come to mind.

|
|Tulip doesn't even own any technology IP, only the brand name,
Do you really think that 'names' can be owned without being used?
How about words in a dictionary?
|so I doubt they could do anything against the emulators anyway.
Rather, they might be able to shut down emulators if they contain copies
of the ROM code. But then, those are NOT trademark problems, those
are copyright problems. You CAN tell the difference, can't you?
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307121801230.16490-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

Can you imagine Jeri as the licensor, Jens as the agent-mediator,
and Tulip as the licensee?

|In a strategic partnership,

Entering into a joint adventure, whether as equals or unequals, is yet another kind of business relationship that could be entertained.

|it might be of interest if they partner with Jen and Jeri and Tulip
|put the units together under the Commodore brand name. This may even
|lead to financial backing for development of C-One laptops and PDAs.

A rather weak 'trademark' position for Tulip does not necessarily
become any stronger by admitting strangers into their business
affairs.

Actually it might improve Tulip's position. For one, Tulip would be
marketing a product under the Commodore brand name while at the same time getting better support from us by marketing a real computer designed
around Commodore. I would actually be interested if they did that. It
would be smart and they will have a platform in their arsenal to market
and build relations with real Commodore users. At the same time, they can
be beneficial in the process of micronizing the C-One into portables and micro-portables like mini-laptops to as small as PDAs and possibly
digital PDA/Phone hybrids. As well as other markets which will expand the platform, technology and brand name. This can be good if done in the
right manner. There would even be an OS in their arsenal that they can
license under strategic partnerships which has mutual benfits.


As of yet, there really hasn't been a commercial use of the brand name in
the US in the manner that would inhibit Tulip. Right now, it is simply up
to Tulip to market now to the US with the Commodore trademark in order to reinforce and strengthen their trademark position. It will be of their interest to make connection to the actual users which they claim to want
in support.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307121751470.16490-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

I pity the fool that has to plug a mouse into his computer.

I pity the fool who can't use a graphical web browser with keyboard
actions. Ever used the TAB key or the DOS based Graphical WebBrowser named Arachnoid (something like that).




--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 19:51:29 -0000, wildstar <wildstar128@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Sorry, my mis-typing here. I told them that it wasn't of any interest.
Sorry for the mistyping here. Forgive me. I did tell them that it was not
of any interest to a Commodore fan.

Fine fine...

We want a real Commodore 64 that
will continue on the basic technology as perhaps additional features.

This probably ever isn't likely.

We
want to use what we already have. We also want to make full use of the >internet with the exception of the evil popups. I have made note of
things that most of you have stated over time.

So evil popups are your _only_ main concern? :-)

PS: I also made a suggestion for them to check out comp.sys.cbm to talk
with many of the people in the Commodore scene as well as other Commodore >mail lists.

This won't happen either. Tulip will never show up here.


Jason

--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jkr7@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On 12 Jul 2003 11:15:16 -0500, Cameron Kaiser <ckaiser@floodgap.com>
wrote:

Hi, Cameron,

It would be interesting to see what effect this has on fan sites and other >non-profits (like, say, Secret Weapons, for one thing).

Very true. Though, I must say, I'm still wondering what they defined
as "300 comercial" sites? I didn't think there were _that_ many
commercial sites.

I do plan to add an addendum to the Commodore history in the 12th edition >that features this absolute load of swill. If anyone from Tulip has any >brains at all, they'd be reading this group (so they aren't).

Keep the word processor open on that addendum as I have a feeling soon
things will get even more interesting.

As for Tulip here in csc, I doubt they'd ever show their face.

Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.

Ugh...

I don't think they're going to be particularly benevolent to current >commercial C64 software houses, though. Why should they be? I strongly
doubt they're interested in new development, since most of those programs
are Commodore versions of desktop tools, like browsers, operating systems,
et cetera.

Yep.


Jason

--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jkr7@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

J. Robertson <jkr7@juno.com> wrote in news:c0j1hv8qr41r7o295ncu42bmoldl5tqs31@4ax.com:

Fine fine...

This probably ever isn't likely.

Possibly if they license the C-One technology. :-D

So evil popups are your _only_ main concern? :-)

At this time when we get into full graphical web browsing. As far as a computer virus, well we should stay clear of them, too. :-)

PS: I also made a suggestion for them to check out comp.sys.cbm to
talk with many of the people in the Commodore scene as well as other >>Commodore mail lists.

This won't happen either. Tulip will never show up here.

It was worth the effort. Maybe if they are serious at any level, they
would do so. At least it give them a fairly free way of getting in
contact with us "Commodore users". It is only senseful for them to do so.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in |news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307121801230.16490-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:
|
|

Can you imagine Jeri as the licensor, Jens as the agent-mediator,
and Tulip as the licensee?

|In a strategic partnership,

Entering into a joint adventure, whether as equals or unequals, is yet another kind of business relationship that could be entertained.

|it might be of interest if they partner with Jen and Jeri and Tulip
|put the units together under the Commodore brand name. This may even
|lead to financial backing for development of C-One laptops and PDAs.

A rather weak 'trademark' position for Tulip does not necessarily
become any stronger by admitting strangers into their business
affairs.

|
|Actually it might improve Tulip's position.

It is debatable whether they can make more money by arranging for
a business partner to share in the use of a particular mark,
and if they DID do that, that sort of thing serves to diminish
their exclusive control over the mark. Their grip over the mark
weakens. One of the most important things about trademarks is
exclusivity, and dealing with the mark from a position of control.

|For one, Tulip would be marketing a product under the Commodore
|brand name while at the same time getting better support from us by
|marketing a real computer designed around Commodore. I would actually
|be interested if they did that. It would be smart and they will have
|a platform in their arsenal to market and build relations with real
|Commodore users. At the same time, they can be beneficial in the
|process of micronizing the C-One into portables and micro-portables
|like mini-laptops to as small as PDAs and possibly digital PDA/Phone
|hybrids. As well as other markets which will expand the platform,
|technology and brand name. This can be good if done in the right manner. |There would even be an OS in their arsenal that they can license
|under strategic partnerships which has mutual benfits.

Really. And what OS might that be? The DOS that Per slapped together,
for accessing the IDE drive?

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in |news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307121751470.16490-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

I pity the fool that has to plug a mouse into his computer.

|
|I pity the fool who can't use a graphical web browser with keyboard
|actions. Ever used the TAB key or the DOS based Graphical WebBrowser
|named Arachnoid (something like that).

What for?

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in |news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307121805220.16490-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:
|
|

Do you really think that 'names' can be owned without being used?

How about words in a dictionary?

|
|Tradenames such as software title name.

Tradenames cannot be owned without being used.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307130002570.6882-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

It is debatable whether they can make more money by arranging for
a business partner to share in the use of a particular mark,
and if they DID do that, that sort of thing serves to diminish
their exclusive control over the mark. Their grip over the mark
weakens. One of the most important things about trademarks is
exclusivity, and dealing with the mark from a position of control.

No, they themselves exclusively use the trademark but they license the
C-One technology to produce and package together in the Commodore
trademark. A partnership on the equipment manufacturing level (OEM
partnership is an option) and then they bundle a system package together
under the Commodore trademark.

Really. And what OS might that be? The DOS that Per slapped together,
for accessing the IDE drive?

NO, Pers didn't build an "OS" or a "DOS". He only built a boot menu
loader system. Which would be used to configure the FPGAs onboard. This
is what you misunderstand. Actually, what I was talking about is things
like =WiNGS=, Wheels SC/GEOS, and possibly some other OSs they would
appear in the future. That is the basis of the statement. This may
include my OS project in the future. As for BASIC, it may imply you too.
So BASIC 2.2 may be a part of a partnership that you can make with Tulip
and Tulip can pay you $2 x 1,000-100,000 copies. This would be $2,000-
$200,000 for you. This means they can by a license to manufacture and pay
you $2 per copy sold or distributed.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307130016470.6882-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in >|news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307121751470.16490-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

I pity the fool that has to plug a mouse into his computer.

|
|I pity the fool who can't use a graphical web browser with keyboard >|actions. Ever used the TAB key or the DOS based Graphical WebBrowser
|named Arachnoid (something like that).

What for?

So you can be able to read what we are talking about and not be so
freakin' ignorant.

Wake up and update your browser. IE is not your only choice and about all browsers for Intel and compatible PCs are free these days simply because
noone is going to pay even $5.00 for a webbrowser when you can download one
or a decent one is already bundled.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307130020310.6882-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in >|news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307121805220.16490-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:
|
|

Do you really think that 'names' can be owned without being used?

How about words in a dictionary?

|
|Tradenames such as software title name.

Tradenames cannot be owned without being used.

In the US. This is something that we have yet anyone taking over the use.
If Tulip was to start production then they would possibly ascertain the trademarks and secure themselves here in the United States.

They did win that Dell case. In a settlement, they will receive $40+
million dollars on a patent issue just recently.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Cameron Kaiser wrote:

Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.

I have to disagree, Cameron. Projects like Basilisk II or vMac are still
alive and kicking, even if you don't get the emulated computers' firmware
with the official releases. Some of us are smart enough to own an universal programmer and be able to read the ROMs, and others are smart enough to accomplish the same purpose of having a working firmware in some other way
;-)

Riccardo


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:

It is debatable whether they can make more money by arranging for
a business partner to share in the use of a particular mark,
and if they DID do that, that sort of thing serves to diminish
their exclusive control over the mark. Their grip over the mark
weakens. One of the most important things about trademarks is
exclusivity, and dealing with the mark from a position of control.

|
|No, they themselves exclusively use the trademark but they license

As licensees or licensors?

|the C-One technology to produce and package together in the Commodore |trademark. A partnership on the equipment manufacturing level (OEM |partnership is an option) and then they bundle a system package together |under the Commodore trademark.

There are so many ambiguities here, that I am going to have to ask
you to rephrase your question.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in |news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307130016470.6882-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:
|

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in |>|news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307121751470.16490-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

I pity the fool that has to plug a mouse into his computer.

|
|I pity the fool who can't use a graphical web browser with keyboard |>|actions. Ever used the TAB key or the DOS based Graphical WebBrowser |>|named Arachnoid (something like that).

What for?

|
|So you can be able to read what we are talking about and not be so
|freakin' ignorant.

Screw 'em if they think that a website is always there, and has info
that is self-authenticating.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:

Tradenames cannot be owned without being used.

|
|In the US.

This is our mutual vantage point, is it not?

|This is something that we have yet anyone taking over the use.

Well, Tulip ought to have ways of proving 'activity' and 'exclusivity,'
if the mark is really being used to their benefit, with others
excluded from it, and the activity is so great as to justify de facto recognition by the public, not just de jure recognition by various
government agents here and there (such as US Customs, for instance).

|If Tulip was to start production then they would possibly ascertain the |trademarks and secure themselves here in the United States.

If the mark is being used all over the place, there is the issue of exclusivity.

|They did win that Dell case.

Citation?

|In a settlement, they will receive $40+ million dollars on a patent
|issue just recently.

We were talking about trademarks, not patents! Keep your questions
of law straight, will you?! Geeeeeze!

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

wildstar <wildstar128@hotmail.com> writes:

Commodore themselves never required a license.

Furthermore, in the early days Commodore released their own
clones of popular arcades without getting proper licensing
(see VIC-20 cartridges like Jelly Monsters). Of course these
titles were removed from the market soon after release.

--
Anders Carlsson
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Looks to me if you have a problem with this is - don't use:

"Commodore" and "Commodore 64" to describe your stuff.


"J. Robertson" wrote:

Saw this mentioned on amiga.org then went to investigate it for
myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link:
Today Tulip Computers NV (Tulip) and Ironstone Partners Ltd.
(Ironstone) signed a licence agreement for a partnership, which is a
major step in the global re-launch of the Commodore brand name.

The key word here is: "The Commodore Brand Name"

Tulip will receive a license fee for all Commodore C64 products
delivered by Ironstone, installed on all computer brands using the
Microsoft or any other operating system and all Commodore 64 branded products.

The Key word here is "Commodore 64 Branded products"

In addition, Tulip will receive a license fee over the
revenue from software downloads, subscriptions and advertising.

So the agreement with ironstone is to collect money every time someone downloads an individual file and/or receives material with the brand names.

Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million loyal Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world. This community is
currently spread over hundreds of unofficial websites. The community
craves acknowledgement and authenticity from the true Commodore C64
brand.

We crave authenticity and knowledge from Commodore, not the brand name.

Tulip is the owner of the brand name Commodore. Through this
partnership Tulip grants to Ironstone the exclusive rights to exploit
the official Commodore C64 web-portal and use of the Commodore 64
brand name.

I like the term "Exploit" there, very appropriate.

Ironstone and Tulip invite the Commodore community to join the
official Commodore C64 web-portal.

I.E. "Join us or we'll sue you for trademark brand infringement."

Currently there are about 300
commercial websites that use the name Commodore or Commodore 64
without having a license from Tulip. Tulip will not allow unauthorised
use of the Commodore brand.

If they aren't 'commercial' it get harder to sue for trademark infringement.

In this partnership, Ironstone will create the official Commodore C64
games and community portal designed to focus and harness the power of
the Commodore C64 user base

Glossary:
Money = Power

and to efficiently provide the services
required by these individuals for a fee.

Specifically, use of the "Commodore" and "Commodore 64" brand name.

The founders of Ironstone are experienced and successful, in previous similar projects Ironstone
achieved a subscriber to pay subscriber conversion rate that was
unparalleled in the Internet space.

Searched for Ironstone via Yahoo, they must have been suing others
previously under a different name.

The main objective of the Ironstone official C64 portal is to unite
this massive global fan base of passionate enthusiasts.

...who are willing to pay for the "Commodore" and "Commodore 64" brand name

Through its
web portal, Ironstone will market the official C64 emulator

I wonder what the "Official C64" emulator is that they plan to use.

in various
software and hardware formats. The games offered by the Ironstone
web-portal will include the famous classic C64 games as well as
exciting new games and will also sell its Commodore-branded products
through the site.

Tulip will get full access to the estimated 6 million users and will
also sell its Commodore branded products through this portal.

Read: Tulip gets everyone's e-mail addresses for targeted marketing.

Tulip
will introduce, the upcoming months, new hardware products under the Commodore brand name, being able to use the C64 emulator.

More PC clones with the C= logo, oh boy! :-P

According to Bjorn Bruggeman, Brand Manager Commodore: Through
strategic partnerships we're creating a web of Commodore partner
companies. Each partner, or licensee, is selected on his unique
expertise and will focus on a specific market segment within the
Commodore strategy.

Step right up fore exclusive 'Commodore Brand" rights for your
technologies, have checkbook ready.

The synergy advantages are huge.

Glossary:
Synnergy = Profit Potential

The license
agreement with Ironstone is an important step in this process and will
enable Tulip to enter a complete new era with almost unlimited
e-commerce opportunities.

Glossary:
Unlimited E-Commerce Opportunities = Uncounted/untested revenue sources.

Darren Melbourne, Creative Director, Ironstone Partners commented, “
The license deal with Tulip is a huge breakthrough for the millions of
C64 enthusiasts and retro gamers around the world who are still loyal
to this incredible games system. Ironstone is committed to bringing
this technology and games library back to prominence on every platform available to us.

1. Get Trademark Rights
2. Sue for $$$
3. ???
4. Prominence!

[snip!]

About Ironstone Partners

{snip!]

Looking at their site:
http://www.ironstonepartners.com/

One of their companies deals with mobile handheld and phone games....
The other a Console Games developer with three dozen games in their history...


--
01000011 01001111 01001101 01001101 01001111 01000100 01001111 01010010 01000101
Larry Anderson - Sysop of Silicon Realms BBS (209) 754-1363
300-14.4k bps
Set your 8-bit C= rigs to sail for http://www.portcommodore.com/ 01000011 01001111 01001101 01010000 01010101 01010100 01000101 01010010 01010011
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Steppe" <steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> writes:

http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corp_article.asp?nid=109, also

The article has vanished into nothingness, it's not accessible
anymore.

I'm trying to access http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corpnews.asp
but get "server too busy" from their IIS:

"The request cannot be processed at this time. The amount
of traffic exceeds the Web site's configured capacity."

Did anyone /. Tulip's website, or what?

I doubt that hackers looking to destroy 6000 web servers would
bother inserting quite on-topic stuff on the sites. Either Tulip
went down by load, or got so many responses from Commodore users
that they brought the page down and will reconsider what to do.

--
Anders Carlsson
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307130414050.17618-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

As licensees or licensors?

Licensor is the person or organization issuing the license. In the
subject manner, Jeri would be the licensor of the C-One technology.
Licensee is the receiver of the license. Like Employer and employee.
Tulip would be the licensee of the C-One technology. As for the Commodore trademark, Tulip would be the licensor and people like us who may want to
use the Commodore trademark would be the licensee.

There are so many ambiguities here, that I am going to have to ask
you to rephrase your question.

Really this is not a question but a statement. I'll help rephrase for you
to understand. Scenario Theory: Tulip gets a license from Jeri to produce C-One and then Tulip assembles a C-One package (fully assembled computer) using the Commodore brand name that Tulip owns. This scenario may
strengthen Tulip's Commodore trademark position. While paying Jeri
royalties on the C-One technology. This is where Jeri will be licensing technology and Tulip using that technology and market it under a brand
name that Tulip owns. This means Tulip would be a licensee of the C-One technology and leverage a niche market with that technology under the Commodore brand name.

Re-read the scenario theory if you have to. I am sure that you should
catch on to what I mean. If you need, read the first response paragraph
that I made.

Tulip can also license the Commodore trademark. This would make them a licensee and licensor.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Global re-launch of COMMODORE by TULIP COMPUTERS N.V. and IRONSTONE PARTNERS LIMITED

Let me know when they start making replacement SID chips - I can always
use some of those. And if they don't know how to produce SIDs, then they aren't really Commodore, no matter what the lawyers say.

Even if they knew, there is no way to produce them economically for
technical
reasons. It just wont happen.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Riccardo Rubini" <rrubini@tmicha.net> writes:

Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.

I have to disagree, Cameron. Projects like Basilisk II or vMac are still >alive and kicking, even if you don't get the emulated computers' firmware >with the official releases. Some of us are smart enough to own an universal >programmer and be able to read the ROMs, and others are smart enough to >accomplish the same purpose of having a working firmware in some other way >;-)

I agree with you in principle, but I'm going to go out on a limb here: if
Tulip is really serious about this, they'll crack down on other emulator development whether or not there's any legal basis for them to do so. All
they have to do is bottle it up in court for awhile, which they can afford
to do, and basically drive development into the ground. They've already
stated they want to make an "official emulator" and they definitely can't
do that with benchmark emulators like VICE being in the majority.

As a judge once remarked in a legal case I had some involvement in (not as
one of the parties, thank goodness), "It's not a matter of right or wrong,
but who can stick it out longer."

That is, if Tulip really is serious about this, and isn't just huffing in
the wind.

--
Cameron Kaiser * ckaiser@floodgap.com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Cameron Kaiser <ckaiser@floodgap.com> writes:

That is, if Tulip really is serious about this, and isn't just
huffing in the wind.

I still believe we should try not to become downright hostile towards
Tulip before we know exactly what they're up to. If they are serious
about maintaining the six million people userbase, they would probably
think twice before screwing the potential customers royally. At least
as long as they are investing money in the Commodore business.

--
Anders Carlsson
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Cameron Kaiser wrote:

I agree with you in principle, but I'm going to go out on a limb
here: if Tulip is really serious about this, they'll crack down on
other emulator development whether or not there's any legal basis for
them to do so.

Well, you mean Tulip going directly to the source, rather than preserving
only the ROMs copyright, and shutting it off ? It could be. It depends
mainly where the lawsuit takes place for them to succeed or having it
accepted by the judge.

For starters their aim could be only to scare non-official emulators
developers off via their lawyers and maybe prosecute those who don't obey to their restrictions.

It could also be that Tulip makes an offer to the VICE team and actually
buys the exclusive of the product, closing the source and asking everybody
and everywhere to remove any previous release. This has happened already to some other piece of software, formerly public domain or freeware and
thereafter sold as a commercial product.

All they have to do is bottle it up in court for
awhile, which they can afford to do, and basically drive development
into the ground.

Yes, probably they can afford it. But I am unsure they'll run a reprisal of
any sort, combing a web page after another. Besides, how much money would
cost to them bringing to court all the people involved in eventual
"unofficial" activity ? If you run a business, you don't have to spend more than you get and it is still way uncertain how big their revenues will be coming from this project.

They've already stated they want to make an
"official emulator" and they definitely can't do that with benchmark emulators like VICE being in the majority.

Making an official emulator could also mean making an emulator official : choosing from the products already available, buying the rights to it and resell it :-)

As a judge once remarked in a legal case I had some involvement in
(not as one of the parties, thank goodness), "It's not a matter of
right or wrong, but who can stick it out longer."

Sad but true...

That is, if Tulip really is serious about this, and isn't just
huffing in the wind.

Only time will tell how serious Tulip is. It's too early and easy to jump at the wrong conclusions.

Riccardo




--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

I wonder if I had a model T ford in the garage still in working
condition if I could change its name to mine and not get sued by Ford!!1
In fact I wonder if copyright laws have a time limit to still be
legally effective after the original producer has been dead for 50
years or so?? This whole discussion about CBM and the legalities
of its copyrighted stuff software etc sounds ridiculous to me!!
Joe (aka kilroy)


****************************************************
* Ham KH6JF AARS/MARS ABM6JF QCWA WW2 VET WD RADIO * ****************************************************



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307150220060.31131-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

Compelled to pay a licensing fee (and legal fees, and court costs)
makes
a lot more sense.

Why do you think that?

Are you SOOOO dense ? Commodore as a word is a "military rank" which is
like an Admiral. Remember Commodore Perry. Now, the word itself as a word
can not be really trademarked but the word in a special proprietary font
and color and any other visual element in conjunction to the word would
be trademarkable because of the addition visual elements other than just
plain letters.

|but the logo itself and the fonted letters and all can be.

Trademarks are usually employed for identification purposes. To this
end, you can slap a trademark on a product. Why, you can even refer
to an entire business by means of its trademark. To add to your
undoubtedly great astonishment, 'Microsoft' is a trademark, and it
is a fairly strong one at that.

Microsoft can be, because it is not a standard dictionary word.
Trademarks are graphical images or graphicalized text used to identify products to a company. For example a logo. For Commodore, it is the C=
head and the "C= commodore" in the blue writing in the texual font that Commodore used. Those would be trademarks but the word as a word is not trademarkable per say and is legal to use because it is a dictionary word referring to a rank title used in the Navy.

|The blue text in the exact font form can be trademarked and the
|"Chicken Head" symbol can be. The word itself can not be under any >|trademark laws.

Hey, think about what you are saying here, why don't you? Although
it may be true that a single word (in isolation) may not be protected
under the COPYRIGHT laws, you are very much mistaken if you think that
a business cannot employ a single word as its tradename, or employ a
single word to describe one of its products. McNuggets, for instance,
is a word that is protected by the trademark laws, just as much as
the company that manufactures it, McDonald's.

Ok, I should say "dictionary word" or a professional title are not
exactly trademarkable unless there is a visual element used with the
text. So if I used a different color and different font then I would
legally be just fine. McNugget is not really a "word". It is a product
name that has been used sooo much. For example, if I used the word "Presidential" in special Red lettering as the logo of a company named Presidential Computers as a trademark. I would not legally be able to
suit you if you use the word "Presidential" in a sentence like the
following as an example:

"The presidential campaign is tomorrow."
^------- Notice !!!!
The word is legally able to be used. Also it is legal to use a company
name or product name of a product for non-commercial use. Such as
discussion about a product.

End of story. There is an acceptable use of trademarks and tradenames
under the US Trademark laws. Tulip does not have the financial structure
to legal battle ever jack and joe who uses the word "Commodore".

Now remember this when you look at the back cover of a 1571 book.
"COMMODORE=" The "=" is being used to represent the flags. Note color, upper-case letters, font elements like how the E is printed, the flags.
It take the little details like that before they can take you to court. Detail, man, detail. Also any logo resembling the chickenhead logo would
get you in trouble. Merely changing the color is not enough in the US.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Are you SOOOO dense ?

As dense as an electron cloud, my little metal buddy.

|Commodore as a word is a "military rank" which is like an Admiral.

Trademarks need not be fanciful to be valid. Even 'Apple' is an
ordinary word you can find in the dictionary. Fanciful elaborations, flourishes, squiggles, tails and curls only help to make weak trademarks stronger.

|Remember Commodore Perry.

So, was the Beatle's Admiral Halsey a commodore also?

|Now, the word itself as a word can not be really trademarked

I'll have to interrupt you right here and now, before you go
too far astray. In fact, a word can be appropriated for use as a
trademark, regardless of its font, size, or color. The trappings
are only valid in answering how STRONG a trademark is. Take a
look at the word 'apple' - it doesn't have to be drawn in a funny
way, or capitalized, or have little flags hanging off of it, to
be taken as a trademark.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307151840390.10686-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Are you SOOOO dense ?

As dense as an electron cloud, my little metal buddy.

|Commodore as a word is a "military rank" which is like an Admiral.

Trademarks need not be fanciful to be valid. Even 'Apple' is an
ordinary word you can find in the dictionary. Fanciful elaborations, flourishes, squiggles, tails and curls only help to make weak
trademarks stronger.

Ordinary words can be a part of a company name and part of a logo
trademark. It requires something unique and special that makes that
trademark of some uniqueness to others. We are talking about branding. A trademark in order to be protected requires those fanciful elaborations
and other special unique elements. Otherwise it is not going to be
protected and much defendable. Anyone can have trademarks but it takes
money, products and some level of documentable "unique" fancifal elements
in order to be legally protected in the US. Do note products again.

|Remember Commodore Perry.

So, was the Beatle's Admiral Halsey a commodore also?

Maybe. I have to look up on that but please stick to the point. You are straying away from the topic.

|Now, the word itself as a word can not be really trademarked

I'll have to interrupt you right here and now, before you go
too far astray. In fact, a word can be appropriated for use as a
trademark, regardless of its font, size, or color. The trappings
are only valid in answering how STRONG a trademark is. Take a
look at the word 'apple' - it doesn't have to be drawn in a funny
way, or capitalized, or have little flags hanging off of it, to
be taken as a trademark.

Apple is a tradename but they were facing trademark situation with Apple Records. So the name is only a corporate name. If you use a specific way
of labeling the letters APPLE in a specific color and letter type before someone else with a product then you can trademark it and go about it.
They really don't have to be super fancy but they have to be unique. So
Apple really defends on the little Apple symbol. This is their real
trademark. A company name may not necassarily be a trademark by the way.

Trademarking the letters "APPLE" gave Apple trouble back in the 1970s.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:

|Commodore as a word is a "military rank" which is like an Admiral.

Trademarks need not be fanciful to be valid. Even 'Apple' is an
ordinary word you can find in the dictionary. Fanciful elaborations, flourishes, squiggles, tails and curls only help to make weak
trademarks stronger.

|
|Ordinary words can be a part of a company name and part of a logo
|trademark.

In fact, they can be the entire company name, and the entire logo
trademark, to boot. They can be the whole kit and caboodle.

|It requires something unique and special that makes that trademark
|of some uniqueness to others.

Actually, where there is nothing unique or special about the mark,
priority of use is what usually tips the balance in favor of that
individual's appropriation.

|We are talking about branding.

We are talking about trademarks.

<snip>

|Remember Commodore Perry.

So, was the Beatle's Admiral Halsey a commodore also?

|
|Maybe. I have to look up on that but please stick to the point.
|You are straying away from the topic.

For the sake of levity. "Hands across the water," you know.

|Now, the word itself as a word can not be really trademarked

I'll have to interrupt you right here and now, before you go
too far astray. In fact, a word can be appropriated for use as a
trademark, regardless of its font, size, or color. The trappings
are only valid in answering how STRONG a trademark is. Take a
look at the word 'apple' - it doesn't have to be drawn in a funny
way, or capitalized, or have little flags hanging off of it, to
be taken as a trademark.

|
|Apple is a tradename but they were facing trademark situation with Apple |Records. So the name is only a corporate name.

You miss the point. It happens to be a pretty ordinary tradename, and
is not very strong at that (except for the market they have become famous
in). Now, if they had always painted it candy red, and had caramel
dripping from it...

|If you use a specific way of labeling the letters APPLE in a specific
|color and letter type before

Prior use is good, first use is even better. Suddenly failing to exclude strangers from the mark MIGHT be excusable, but if this happens for a
prolonged period of time, the courts will raise an eyebrow, and look
at it much more closely.

|someone else with a product then you can trademark it and go about it.
|They really don't have to be super fancy but they have to be unique.

They have to be 'unique' if you want to have a 'strong' trademark.
Anybody can set himself up in business as the 'king' of some particular
trade - be it carwashing, chimney sweeping, or radio repair - but making
it unique only serves to make it stronger than would otherwise be the
case.

|So Apple really defends on the little Apple symbol. This is their real |trademark. A company name may not necassarily be a trademark by the way.
|
|Trademarking the letters "APPLE" gave Apple trouble back in the 1970s.

It sure helped Apple to have cornered the computer market, or else we
would have had ended up with a whole lot more apples, acorns, almonds,
and artichokes all over the place.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113