From: nonfunctional@nowhere.com   
      
   wicked wrote:   
   >   
   > MC (temp) Dan [no email] wrote:   
   > >   
   > > Jose wrote:   
   > >>> Correct me if i am wrong: did not Netscape use the name "communicator"   
   for its e-mail client?   
   > >>>   Did they or did they not trade-mark that name?   
   > >> Other companies have used the word too, and I suspect that, being   
   > >> generic, it's not really trademarkable.   
   > >>   
   > >> Jose   
   > >   
   > > Well, it WAS a trademarked name   
   > > Netscape Communicator™ is a trademark of Netscape Communications   
   Corporation.   
   > > Netscape Navigator is a trademark of Netscape Communications Corporation.   
   > > Netscape Messenger is a trademark of Netscape Communications Corporation.   
   > > Netscape Collabra is a trademark of Netscape Communications Corporation.   
   > > Netscape Netcaster is a trademark of Netscape Communications Corporation.   
   > >   
   > >   
   > > Perhaps AOL (who is now the owner of Netscape Communications Corporation in   
   > > such matters) didnt care to enforce the trademark. Perhaps Windows paid AOL   
   > > for the 'rights' to use the name?   
   > > Since Netscape Corporation (and AOL) are/were both US Entities, then it   
   would   
   > > be assumed that US law would pertain as to trademarks - I think there is a   
   > > five year 'term' for trademarks, afterwhich they may be re-newed, or   
   declared   
   > > expired.   
   > > In any case, it would be up to AOL to enforce the trademark and the use of   
   > > such   
   >   
   > Note that in all of these cases, the tm includes the word "Netscape". I   
   > suspect the tm applies to the entire phrase "Netscape Communicator™" and   
   > not to just the word "Communicator".   
      
      
   Could be, but the discussion is moot anyway. It would be up to AOL to pursue   
   the matter in any case.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)