@dhh but the broader point is that's a legal question. Let a judge sort it out.
-
-
Replying to @wycats2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
-
Replying to @mitsuhiko
@mitsuhiko@dhh sure, but npm says this isn't about a trademark dispute at all, but rather their own opinion.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats@mitsuhiko Yes, it's their opinion that the trademark holder had a strong case that they would lose in court. Good assessment imo.2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @dhh
@dhh@mitsuhiko Did you read their blog post. They expressly say it was NOT a decision based on IP.4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats@mitsuhiko Did not. Making a comment on why you'd fold when faced with a legit trademark case rather than lose expensive trial.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @dhh
@dhh@wycats@mitsuhiko i'd also consult a lawyer before proceeding in either direction1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jbogard
@jbogard@wycats@mitsuhiko All that being said, surely this all could have been handled better. But choosing to side with legit TM isn't it1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dhh
@dhh@jbogard@mitsuhiko there are multiple kiks that make software that have legal and active tm3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@mitsuhiko @dhh @jbogard no it just indicates that trademark doesn't entitle you to global ownership over three letter. Just scoped.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.