Author Topic: Shame on you, Comodo!  (Read 87877 times)

Offline michaelrose

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #30 on: June 24, 2016, 10:31:50 PM »
I should of stayed out of the entire thread, but as a paralegal I have a firm grasp of copyright and fair use law. In these cases the law is clear and will be decided on subject matter and scope of copyright, copyright notice, deposit, and registration. If ISRG has not followed these guidelines then they simply have no legal basis. I hope Comodo prevails, but then again I'm biased.

Sayer is there a good reason your education didn't prepare you to differentiate between copyright and trademarks. Furthermore regarding copyright doesn't even work that way everything is copyrighted with or without registration and failure to register doesn't imply that it is my privilege to plaguerize you and claim the right to based on your failure.

Your statements thus far are so off I doubt that you are actually a paralegal

Offline JoWa

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5714
  • I believe in doubt.
    • Evolutionary history of life
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #31 on: June 25, 2016, 12:38:16 AM »
[at]jowa about the free certs. According to the site i linked at the bottom of page 1, there ain't just no automatic renewal but more like no renewal AT ALL (one issuance per domain)
That might change, because the fittest will survive, and automatic renewal will be essential for survival. I don’t see how selling DV-certificates will survive. It probably won’t.
Ubuntu 18.10 | Chrome 73β | HTTPS Everywhere | Privacy Badger
Forum Policy | Comodo Product Help

Offline captainsticks

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 11198
    • Comodo Help
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #32 on: June 25, 2016, 01:11:41 AM »
Sayer is there a good reason your education didn't prepare you to differentiate between copyright and trademarks. Furthermore regarding copyright doesn't even work that way everything is copyrighted with or without registration and failure to register doesn't imply that it is my privilege to plaguerize you and claim the right to based on your failure.

Your statements thus far are so off I doubt that you are actually a paralegal
Hi michaelrose,
While on the subject of education, please read the T&Cs of the Forum Policy.
We need to respect other users comments and opinions.
Forum Policy Sect 5

Thank you.



The way I see this situation is everyone is happy to show judgement, but how many of you know all the facts and details (Not just something you read either, as anything can be written whether it is true or false)
« Last Edit: June 25, 2016, 01:17:46 AM by captainsticks »

Offline michaelrose

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #33 on: June 25, 2016, 01:38:33 AM »
There is nothing so complicated that one would need to consult a lawyer or even a paralegal.

The facts are incredibly obvious. Painfully so even. Let's encrypt existed for years before Comodo attempted to steal their name. At best it was an attempt to attack their competition by making them waste money on legal fees at worst an attempt to derail them by forcing a name change and create confusion about the let's encrypt brand.

Worse when Comodo was caught behaving poorly. When they were called on it their ceo spewed a bunch of nonsense then backpedeled without admitting wrong doing or fault.

As a result their rep is approximately at used car salesman level.

If you actually care what prospective customers think of you it's time for a mea culpa plus your ceos resignation.

As to the legal professional I honestly believe he is misleading people about his profession and adding to the confusion. I am not personally attacking him I truly believe it's impossible that he is a paralegal and confused copyright and trademark.


Offline Dennis2

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9462
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #34 on: June 25, 2016, 02:08:38 AM »
snip

As to the legal professional I honestly believe he is misleading people about his profession and adding to the confusion. I am not personally attacking him I truly believe it's impossible that he is a paralegal and confused copyright and trademark.
I am afraid you are, please read the Forum Policy

To anyone who posts in the this topic, further posts in this topic which are only to insult or be rude in anyway will result in that member being banned.

If you feel the need to Troll do it elsewhere.

Comodo has filed for express abandonment of the trademark applications at
this time instead of waiting and allowing them to lapse.

Following collaboration between Let's Encrypt and Comodo, the trademark
issue is now resolved and behind us and we'd like to thank the Let's Encrypt
team for helping to bring it to a to a resolution.

Please note the above post which closes the topic, no we do not lock topics.

Thank you

Dennis
Moderator: Aims Forum a friendly place. Any concerns? Please PM me and/or review the Forum Policy 2012Updated.
System: Centos 7.5 x64, APF, HTTPS Everywhere, ABP, NoScript
 Fedora 28 x64, APF, HTTPS Everywhere, ABP

Offline JoWa

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5714
  • I believe in doubt.
    • Evolutionary history of life
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #35 on: June 25, 2016, 02:36:36 AM »
Ubuntu 18.10 | Chrome 73β | HTTPS Everywhere | Privacy Badger
Forum Policy | Comodo Product Help

Offline sAyer

  • Star Group
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
  • If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door.
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #36 on: June 25, 2016, 02:38:43 AM »
Sayer is there a good reason your education didn't prepare you to differentiate between copyright and trademarks. Furthermore regarding copyright doesn't even work that way everything is copyrighted with or without registration and failure to register doesn't imply that it is my privilege to plaguerize you and claim the right to based on your failure.

Your statements thus far are so off I doubt that you are actually a paralegal

You are absolutely off your rocker. Everything is not copyrighted without registration? Is this post that I'm making right now copyrighted ? It could not even be considered intellectual property. Trademark and copyright registrations are both issued by the federal government and protect two distinct types of intellectual property. You can also include patent law under the same scope. Copyright works for a fixed tangible medium. Where trademark distinguishes the source of the goods or services of one person or company. Both provide the owner with the right to exclude others from using their work without permission. Under both pretenses ISRG has no claim to ownership of  the phrase “Let’s Encrypt”.

Let's encrypt may have existed for years using the name before Comodo used the name (which by legal ownership does not belong to ISRG), and they have no legal or binding ownership of it. That is simple and any first year law student could tell you that.

Copyright/trademark requires use and distinctiveness (and registration if you want any real protections). If LSRG did not realize that then to bad.

Please do not come around here stating facts and your opinions that are wrong and misguided. I would give you a true piece of my mind but I have too much respect for the mod's on this forum.

With that said recheck your facts and only post on things you really understand.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2016, 02:41:32 AM by sAyer »
"You affect the world by what you browse." - Tim Berners-Lee

"When you change the rules on what controls you - you will change the rules on what you can control.” ― Revolver

Offline My1

  • Comodo Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #37 on: June 25, 2016, 02:55:58 AM »
That might change, because the fittest will survive, and automatic renewal will be essential for survival. I don’t see how selling DV-certificates will survive. It probably won’t.

well the one only thing they actually COULD sell would be wildcards because there have been no free wildcards, but if they will I hope it will be cheap.

also I dont care whether or not they will do it in the future. the CEO stated that LE stole their model of 90 day free certs, which is a point I just cannot agree with because their certs werent really free but pretty much just a trial.

Let's encrypt may have existed for years using the name before Comodo used the name (which by legal ownership does not belong to ISRG), and they have no legal or binding ownership of it. That is simple and any first year law student could tell you that.
except for the fact that they didnt use the name (yet) but stated that they want to in the future, I cant say anything about that but I think similar to patents they should really make a law that's similar to the "prior art" concept of patents.


Hi michaelrose,
While on the subject of education, please read the T&Cs of the Forum Policy.
We need to respect other users comments and opinions.
Forum Policy Sect 5

Thank you.



The way I see this situation is everyone is happy to show judgement, but how many of you know all the facts and details (Not just something you read either, as anything can be written whether it is true or false)
I dont think that just doubting whether a person has one job or another is in my opinion not something that could be offensive, especially considering your final sentences that anyone can write anything in the web.
if he would have said something along the likes "no way in hell you are a paralegal you little ..." well yeah I get what you mean but he just stated that he doubts that he's a paralegal (I dont really know what a paralegal is, but I dont think that's so important right now)

Offline michaelrose

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #38 on: June 25, 2016, 03:06:27 AM »
You are absolutely off your rocker. Everything is not copyrighted without registration? Is this post that I'm making right now copyrighted ?

Yes, yes it is.  In laymans language see http://jux.law/does-a-copyright-have-to-be-registered-to-be-valid/ Short answer is no it needn't be registered to be copyrighted.  If I understand properly this was so as of 1976 aprox 50 years ago I could be off on that one though.

Copyright works for a fixed tangible medium.

Nope.

Where trademark distinguishes the source of the goods or services of one person or company. Both provide the owner with the right to exclude others from using their work without permission. Under both pretenses ISRG has no claim to ownership of  the phrase “Let’s Encrypt”.

Let's encrypt may have existed for years using the name before Comodo used the name (which by legal ownership does not belong to ISRG), and they have no legal or binding ownership of it. That is simple and any first year law student could tell you that.

Copyright/trademark requires use and distinctiveness (and registration if you want any real protections). If LSRG did not realize that then to bad.


As you yourself noted the purpose of trademark is to avoid confusion.  Specifically "Where trademark distinguishes the source of the goods or services of one person or company." No court in their right mind knowing that a competitor had been doing business for multiple years under that name would have granted it to Comodo.  This is a clear perversion of the letter and spirit of the law.  Attempting to sow confusion rather than prevent it!
 

Why on earth do you think they back peddled so fast?  Do you think its acceptable to play games and hope the courts don't call you on it or do you think a companies public behavior ought to be above reproach and straightforward?  This isn't a legitimate strategy its an open attack on something that would otherwise benefit us all.

Offline sAyer

  • Star Group
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
  • If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door.
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #39 on: June 25, 2016, 03:36:05 AM »
Yes, yes it is.  In laymans language see http://jux.law/does-a-copyright-have-to-be-registered-to-be-valid/ Short answer is no it needn't be registered to be copyrighted.  If I understand properly this was so as of 1976 aprox 50 years ago I could be off on that one though.

Nope.

As you yourself noted the purpose of trademark is to avoid confusion.  Specifically "Where trademark distinguishes the source of the goods or services of one person or company." No court in their right mind knowing that a competitor had been doing business for multiple years under that name would have granted it to Comodo.  This is a clear perversion of the letter and spirit of the law.  Attempting to sow confusion rather than prevent it!
 

Why on earth do you think they back peddled so fast?  Do you think its acceptable to play games and hope the courts don't call you on it or do you think a companies public behavior ought to be above reproach and straightforward?  This isn't a legitimate strategy its an open attack on something that would otherwise benefit us all.

This could go back and fourth and on an on. Let me give you a simple example. Let's say a man opens a restaurant named Jake's Hamburgers, and the restaurant is a great success. Over the year's with the success he open dozens of others over many years. This business owner never trademarks the name.

Another man opens a single restaurant only a few weeks old and trademarks the name Jake's Hamburgers. This man finds out that the other owner is running multiple restaurants with his trademarked name. the man with the trademark could file suit and in any court in America and force the older business to cease using the name on all his restaurants immediately. The courts will always side with the owner of registration.

This is plain and simple law and designed that way to protect ownership of the trademark holder.  If ISRG did not own the trademark and Comodo filed for ownership first there is a great chance Comodo would have legal rights to the phrase.

I do not know all the details of this particular case but I do know what I'm talking about. I was a paralegal for 2 years with my friend's Law Firm years ago and he specialized in these matters and I learned a lot from my experience. Enough to know I'm correct if I understand the facts correctly.

Either-way I'm done with this as it does not concern me.
"You affect the world by what you browse." - Tim Berners-Lee

"When you change the rules on what controls you - you will change the rules on what you can control.” ― Revolver

Offline michaelrose

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #40 on: June 25, 2016, 03:54:42 AM »
This could go back and fourth and on an on. Let me give you a simple example. Let's say a man opens a restaurant named Jake's Hamburgers, and the restaurant is a great success. Over the year's with the success he open dozens of others over many years. This business owner never trademarks the name.

Another man opens a single restaurant only a few weeks old and trademarks the name Jake's Hamburgers. This man finds out that the other owner is running multiple restaurants with his trademarked name. the man with the trademark could file suit and in any court in America and force the older business to cease using the name on all his restaurants immediately. The courts will always side with the owner of registration.

This is plain and simple law and designed that way to protect ownership of the trademark holder.  If ISRG did not own the trademark and Comodo filed for ownership first there is a great chance Comodo would have legal rights to the phrase.

I do not know all the details of this particular case but I do know what I'm talking about. I was a paralegal for 2 years with my friend's Law Firm years ago and he specialized in these matters and I learned a lot from my experience. Enough to know I'm correct if I understand the facts correctly.

Either-way I'm done with this as it does not concern me.

You don't become a lawyer by osmosis and filing papers.  This is why no number of years working in a doctors office that qualifies you as an MD and medical billing specialists don't get to use scalpels.

Your analysis regarding Jakes Burgers is woefully simplistic.  Please see http://www.fr.com/news/prior-user-vs-federal-registrant-whose-mark-is-it-anyway1/

Let me paste the most relevant sections.

"Who is a Prior User?
Under common law, trademark rights within a certain territory are based on priority of use of a mark within that territory. Sometimes a federal registrant is not the first user of a mark in a territory, and that an unregistered prior user may have superior rights, at least in that territory. Determining the rights of the parties in such situations requires a careful evaluation of often complex facts and always complex law."

"Under Section 7(c) of the Trademark Act, the date of filing an application, whether based on actual use or intent to use, establishes a registrant’s date of “constructive use,” establishing nationwide priority except against a person who began use (or applied for and ultimately obtained registration) of the mark prior to that date. Thus, a “prior user” is a party who began use somewhere or applied for the mark prior to the registrant’s application date."

"Conclusion
While owning a trademark registration provides many significant benefits, registration by itself does not conclusively establish the owner’s exclusive right to use the mark. Prior users have significant protection under the Trademark Act, and those rights should not be overlooked in any trademark dispute."

Offline JoWa

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5714
  • I believe in doubt.
    • Evolutionary history of life
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #41 on: June 25, 2016, 03:56:48 AM »
well the one only thing they actually COULD sell would be wildcards because there have been no free wildcards, but if they will I hope it will be cheap.

also I dont care whether or not they will do it in the future. the CEO stated that LE stole their model of 90 day free certs, which is a point I just cannot agree with because their certs werent really free but pretty much just a trial.
That free wildcard certificates are currently not available doesn’t mean it makes sense to charge for them. And the availability may change at any time. Also, with SAN available, the need for wildcard should be rather small.

As I said in a previous post, I think the choice of ninety days was a compromise, when automatic renewal was not yet available. I even quoted Josh Aas saying “Once automated renewal tools are widely deployed and working well, we may consider even shorter lifetimes.” Just a temporary (Well, that remains to be seen.) compromise. With automatic renewal, certificates’ lifetime has nothing to do with business models, as there is no reason to pay for a longer lifetime when the short lifetime does not cause any extra work (frequent manual renewals).
Ubuntu 18.10 | Chrome 73β | HTTPS Everywhere | Privacy Badger
Forum Policy | Comodo Product Help

Offline captainsticks

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 11198
    • Comodo Help
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #42 on: June 25, 2016, 04:08:38 AM »
Everyone,
It looks to me as if some (Not all) members are here just to self promote their knowledge and nothing more.
This along with the slinging match questioning ability, knowledge, education and intellect of each other is way off topic.

To show respect to the Forum Policy and to all members, please stay on topic or don't waste your time or mine posting.

Thank you.

Offline My1

  • Comodo Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #43 on: June 25, 2016, 04:20:19 AM »
That free wildcard certificates are currently not available doesn’t mean it makes sense to charge for them. And the availability may change at any time. Also, with SAN available, the need for wildcard should be rather small.

As I said in a previous post, I think the choice of ninety days was a compromise, when automatic renewal was not yet available. I even quoted Josh Aas saying “Once automated renewal tools are widely deployed and working well, we may consider even shorter lifetimes.” Just a temporary (Well, that remains to be seen.) compromise. With automatic renewal, certificates’ lifetime has nothing to do with business models, as there is no reason to pay for a longer lifetime when the short lifetime does not cause any extra work (frequent manual renewals).

I just said they could, not that they should.

well SAN is nice and all but one problem of SANs is the obvious problem that the more sans you add the lager the cert gets, and you have to switch the cert every time you want to change the SANs wich might not be needed with wiledards.

also automatic renewal is something where I am a little bit sceptical, mainly because everytime the cert renews, unless the script is absolutely perfect (let's be ealistic this wont happen) you always should check whether the renewal went as it should, ESPECIALLY when you use HSTS or HPKP, and with longer lifetimes that worry isnt there.
also OCSP stapling is already a thing so for people who are sceptical about manual renewal and rather want longer times they could use Must-staple which also removes the need for the user to check an OCSP server (which doesnt even happen on some mobile browsers)

Offline sAyer

  • Star Group
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
  • If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door.
Re: Shame on you, Comodo!
« Reply #44 on: June 25, 2016, 04:49:29 AM »
You don't become a lawyer by osmosis and filing papers.  This is why no number of years working in a doctors office that qualifies you as an MD and medical billing specialists don't get to use scalpels.

Your analysis regarding Jakes Burgers is woefully simplistic.  Please see http://www.fr.com/news/prior-user-vs-federal-registrant-whose-mark-is-it-anyway1/

Let me paste the most relevant sections.

"Who is a Prior User?
Under common law, trademark rights within a certain territory are based on priority of use of a mark within that territory. Sometimes a federal registrant is not the first user of a mark in a territory, and that an unregistered prior user may have superior rights, at least in that territory. Determining the rights of the parties in such situations requires a careful evaluation of often complex facts and always complex law."

"Under Section 7(c) of the Trademark Act, the date of filing an application, whether based on actual use or intent to use, establishes a registrant’s date of “constructive use,” establishing nationwide priority except against a person who began use (or applied for and ultimately obtained registration) of the mark prior to that date. Thus, a “prior user” is a party who began use somewhere or applied for the mark prior to the registrant’s application date."

"Conclusion
While owning a trademark registration provides many significant benefits, registration by itself does not conclusively establish the owner’s exclusive right to use the mark. Prior users have significant protection under the Trademark Act, and those rights should not be overlooked in any trademark dispute."

I never said I was a lawyer, and have had enough of you and this discussion. Like I said earlier in my second post I should have stayed out of it. I'm here on this forum for Comodo Internet Security. That is something I am an expert at and about. So please leave me out of any further posts you may have on this subject. Just so that were clear please read this post twice so we can avoid any unnecessary unpleasantness.
"You affect the world by what you browse." - Tim Berners-Lee

"When you change the rules on what controls you - you will change the rules on what you can control.” ― Revolver

 

Free Endpoint Protection
Seo4Smf 2.0 © SmfMod.Com Smf Destek