Symantec asks G4L to stop infringing on Ghost name
Posted by: Anonymous
on October 07, 2007 08:47 AM
How about we require Symantec to provide truth in product branding and have them label their PC security suite - "Crap for Windows" as it slows down every PC that I have seen it installed on to a crawl. They would then presumably try and trademark the word CRAP and the letter "C".
I am a network admin for over 500 PCs and have used Ghost (since back when it was Norton Ghost) for many years. It USED to be a good product but recent versions have been increasingly problematic to use on a Windows network (which is kind of the point to using Ghost (tm) - or shall we refer to it as the G-word (no tm)). Also, the license fees have grown to the point where I am considering going to CLONEZILLA as Symantec are simply rapacious.
A question - If I die and come back and haunt Symantec - do I have to where a stupid TM sign around my neck or would I be breaching their trademark? Or can I just get away with it by calling myself a poltergeist?
I think trademark and copyright lawyers are bottom-feeders. When they go after people such as the G4L creators they should be called out as the impediments to trade and commerce that they are and any actions should be thrown out of court. Why? BECAUSE SYMANTEC DON'T HAVE A PRODUCT CALLED GHOST FOR LINUX!!!! If they created one they MIGHT have a point. However, given that someone beat them to it they would have to prove prior intent since they cannot show prior product. Trademarks are messy to claim and trying to enforce them to the point of claiming to own the letter "G" presumably for "GRUBBY GREEDY GRAB for cash". I also think that they (Symantec and their lawyers) should be banned from using ANY open source product or service (such as Linux, Firefox or any site that uses Apache for example) and see what they think about the place of open source when they aren't allowed to use any of it.