[gui-talk] Thoughts on Freedom Scientific V Serotek
Joel Deutsch
jdeutsch at dslextreme.com
Wed May 23 13:55:00 CDT 2007
Well, I'm on a mailing list, which shall remain unnamed here, where it seems
that about one quarter of the subscribers don't know whether what they're
doing is taking place in Jaws, or Windows, or Word, or whatever.
However they learned or were taught to use a computer, the functions are all
sort of mashed up together in their minds, and this really kind of depresses
me. The conflation. Those are the folks who refer to everything as their
"computer." Not even "system," which is one step more sophisticated, by
which I don't mean anything pretentious. How does this happen? It's way over
the top for me, and I can't figure out what kind of learning experience
results in such misconceptions. I mean, isn't it simple to learn that you
have a computer, and to do anything, it needs an operating system, say
Windows, and then you can run programs, like Word, for example. but if you
can't see or read the screen, you can use Jaws or another screen reader to
do that for you. How hard is that to teach or to learn? I'm not being
sarcastic. I'm really puzzled and a little bummed out by this. I know how
big a premium the NFB puts on education toward the goal of employability,
and I hasten to say I've never seen any people like that on this mailing
list, which has a very professional cast to it. But lists like this other
one, I don't know. I can't see how some of those people could ever be
considered for employment or impress anyone with their competence, although
I'm sure there's everything on that list from self-employed entrepreneurs to
lawyers and, yes, to a lot of people living on the dole in one form or
another, I'm sure. But it's so sad, this level of confusion.
Sorry,Sorry. Just venting the frustration and sadness that all evokes in me.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Baracco, Andrew W" <Andrew.Baracco at va.gov>
To: "NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List" <gui-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Thoughts on Freedom Scientific V Serotek
I have talked to people who do not know that JAWS is their screen reader
and not the operating system.
Andy
-----Original Message-----
From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
On Behalf Of W. Nick Dotson
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:29 PM
To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Thoughts on Freedom Scientific V Serotek
T'is truth! People call the tech support line for everything from
Kurzweil Music Systems products, Yung and Chang, to ZoomText, Xerox
Imaging Systems long since no longer manufacturered or supported, to
WindowEyes JAWS and on and on. Most people, especially newly blinded
folks are clueless about where one product ends off and another begins,
or what they have, after all, someone else installed it, why should they
know anything??? (tired expression)
Nick
On Tue, 22 May 2007 20:55:59 -0700, Jon C. Pierson wrote:
Hi,
Now in terms of doing tech support and having uninformed people call -
I have had folks call me thinking any given company made the
screenreader or magnification software of the others, even though the
names were in no way similar. There are still folks out there who think
the c p u is the tower for pity sake.
Jon C. Pierson
-----Original Message-----
From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
On Behalf Of Doug Lee
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 4:11 PM
To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Thoughts on Freedom Scientific V Serotek
Regardless of what trademark law may say, and I admit I have yet to
study it carefully, my question is one of intent: What did Serotek
intend by picking the name FreedomBox? As I see it, if they intended
harm directly against FS, they should lose; but if they merely intended
to choose a nice name and did not consider the name Freedom Scientific
when doing so, they deserve to win. I have yet to be convinced that
Serotek's intent was anything synister to enough to warrant a lawsuit
either. I may be wrong on one or both of these points.
Ironically, I would have thought Serotek would be the more upset over
the idea of FS getting calls about FreedomBox. I would think Serotek
would much rather get their own name into the minds of anyone
interested in their products. I would have been much more concerned,
if working for FS, if someone came up with a company name like Job Aids
for Work Systems, because that could get abbreviated JAWS and make JAWS
For Windows appear to come from them. I think I would then fight for
the JAWS trademark, assuming as I do that there is one.
So even though I'm sure I could say a lot more, I'll just express my
hope, and prayer to be honest, that the outcome of this case is decided
in keeping with the intent of all those involved therein.
Disclaimer: These are my opinions, drawn from my mind and no one
else's. I am a well recognized JAWS scripter and intend to continue
being so.
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 09:50:57AM +1200, Jonathan Mosen wrote:
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
--
Doug Lee dgl at dlee.org
SSB + BART Group doug.lee at ssbbartgroup.com
http://www.ssbbartgroup.com
"Never does the human soul appear so strong as when it foregoes
revenge, and dares forgive an injury." --E. H. Chapin
_______________________________________________
gui-talk mailing list
gui-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
_______________________________________________
gui-talk mailing list
gui-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
_______________________________________________
gui-talk mailing list
gui-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
_______________________________________________
gui-talk mailing list
gui-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/815 - Release Date: 5/22/2007
3:49 PM
More information about the gui-talk
mailing list