[gui-talk] Thoughts on Freedom Scientific V Serotek

[Ankers, Dave (UK)]

Jonathan,

Well now we know why we pay through the nose to the accessibility
products big boy don't we.  Instead of investing profits into research
and development, FS is more interested in nit picking over brand names.
Personally I did not confuse the Freedom box with Freedom scientific and
see it as a way of doing away with a smaller company in a niche market.
FS products are expensive, not only to purchase but to keep up to date
and every time a new version is released, it seems to take a step
backwards.  How many times has the newer version not worked as well as
the old one? Requiring fixes immediately, just look at JAWS version 8!
FS would do better spending its money where it matters, on its products!
Leave the smaller companies alone, those that cannot afford JAWS need
them.  If FS continues, I for one will not be purchasing any more
products from Freedom Scientific.
 
Dave

Last week, Freedom Scientific, Inc. filed suit against Serotek
Corporation for trademark infringement with respect to the FreedomBox
range of products.
Since then, the matter has been discussed at length on some
blindness-related blogs and e-mail lists. I'd like by way of this
message to clarify what I view as some of the objectives of the suit. I
am a Vice President at Freedom Scientific, and am extremely proud to
work there.
However writing this message is my own initiative as a former technology
journalist. My aim in doing this is that people at least get a chance to
consider facts over rhetoric.

Firstly, let me talk a little about trademark law. A trademark's purpose
is to exclusively identify a source and origin of products. Importantly,
a trademark only applies to a certain range of goods or services. One of
the questions I have seen on e-mail lists is, "how can Freedom
Scientific claim to own the word Freedom." By taking this action,
Freedom Scientific is not seeking to do this. Rather, Freedom Scientific
is simply enforcing the Freedom Scientific trademark, which it owns for
certain goods. Freedom Scientific has invested to establish its
trademarks and is only seeking to enforce these valuable rights. Freedom
Scientific has the legal right, and the obligation to its customers and
shareholders, to protect the use of its trademark in the context of
assistive technology. The concept of using common words in trademarks is
common - for example the use of the word Apple to describe a computer
company. As is well known through recent news stories, Apple is quite
entitled to own this name in the context of computer hardware and
software products. It does not, of course, mean that Apple has any
rights to the name when you eat a piece of fruit. Trademarks can
co-exist where there is no similarity between the businesses. For
example, Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets are trademarks, but there is
no issue there because the businesses' purposes are totally different
and there is no room for confusion. Freedom Scientific is confident that
its trademark rights will be upheld. The broadening of scope of the
FreedomBox products to include products like FreedomBox System Access
(FBSA) offering access to mainstream applications only exacerbates the
infringement. 

Trademarks are not some abstract thing. They are a company's reputation.
They are legal property, and you can't simply take someone's property
without their consent.

Secondly, I'd like to turn to the question, "why now." All sorts of
bizarre speculation have been put forward as to the timing of this suit.
Freedom Scientific made Serotek well aware of its position on this
matter, but unfortunately Serotek was unwilling to negotiate a
settlement to this matter. No one likes having to go to court, but if
you genuinely believe your property rights are being trampled upon, in
the end there is no choice but to do so if you are unable to get a
resolution any other way.

Thirdly, it has been said that Freedom Scientific is giving the blind
community no credit by taking this action, and that everyone knows the
difference between the two product lines. Rest assured, this is most
certainly not the case. I can tell you that Freedom Scientific has been
contacted by Serotek customers seeking technical support, or even
wanting to buy a Serotek product. Thus, there is a likelihood of
confusion.

Fourthly, a petition has been established by the hosts of ACB Radio's
Main Menu, calling itself the Save Serotek petition. The grossly
misleading name of this petition implies that somehow Freedom
Scientific's objective is to put Serotek out of business. As a result of
the sensationalist name, many commenters to the Petition have made
comments to this effect. All Freedom Scientific is seeking to do is
protect its property and to seek appropriate compensation for the
unlawful use of it. 

The objective here is not to put Serotek out of business. 2007 has
already seen great innovation from Freedom Scientific and there's plenty
more to come. Honest competition inspires excellence and is good news
for the customer. But I stress the word "honest." Yes, many people in
assistive technology are motivated by a strong sense of purpose and
commitment to making a difference. But these companies are still
commercial entities, who have every right to use the legal system to
protect their property if they think they need to, just as you have a
right to use the legal system if someone breaks into your house and
takes something belonging to you

In closing, I hope that those genuinely interested in the facts of this
matter will take the time to read up on trademark case law, but most
importantly, will let the judicial process take its course. It occurs to
me that if Freedom Scientific has got it as wrong as a few people claim,
then what do they have to fear? A jury will dismiss the case. I doubt
that will happen though. If the law has been broken as I believe it has,
then Freedom Scientific is quite entitled to redress.

My hope is that sanity prevails and that Serotek has both the courage
and the decency to brand its products in a fashion that wasn't already
being used in this industry. I think they would gain a lot of respect
from the blind community for acting honourably. Fair competition is not
too much to ask for, and it most certainly is worth fighting for.

Those interested in the subject of trademarks may like to take a look at
the Wikipedia entry on the subject, found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark.

Jonathan Mosen

_______________________________________________
gui-talk mailing list
gui-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk




********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************