"pacman"

bionnaki · 2008-01-22 06:32:53

not sure if there has ever been discussion on this subject, but could the name of arch's package manager "pacman" be troublesome due to copyright issues with the owners of "Pac-man" the game? I remember when mozilla firebird was changed to firefox because of similar issues.

Allan · 2008-01-22 06:44:44

I can't see how these could be mixed up. The package manager clearly does not use a hyphen in its name....

bionnaki · 2008-01-22 07:42:09

a corporate copyright attorney could sue the proprietors of archlinux and easily win. hyphen or not, "Pac-Man" and pacman are both verbalized the same and exist within the same market (i.e. computers). yes, it is a stretch, but all that is stopping them, really, is knowledge that pacman/archlinux exist.

bionnaki · 2008-01-22 08:04:51

"ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I present you Exhibit A of copyright infringement:

pacman -V

Judge, I rest my case."

_adam_ · 2008-01-22 08:19:45

This is not a copyright issue, this would be trademark. I'm not a lawyer, but from what I know, the product of the offending name has to be in competition/same field of interest as the product of the defending trademark. pacman(package manager) is not in competition with Pac-man(arcade game). However, it does get kinda fuzzy since they are both computer programs, and the output of ``pacman -V" probably doesn't help much. Seriously, though, I don't think its anything to be worried about. Arch is just a niche of a (albeit large) niche.

fumbles · 2008-01-22 09:02:05

Copyright, trademark, same diff, still an infringement on whoevers intellectual property.
No one would sue Arch primarily due to Arch having no money to take. As long as you don't make a game of installing updates, and then try and sell it.

tlaloc · 2008-01-22 11:25:03

fumbles wrote:

No one would sue Arch primarily due to Arch having no money to take.

Well, I wouldn't rely on that - you can get sued for the biggest nonsense. But what about a free game like kpacman? A direct clone, isn't it?

Arch-pacman is different enough. They should sue others in the first place. Moreover, until the first letters from lawyers drop in, I simply don't care ...

PS: As a translator, I am marginally involved in pacman-devolpment. So, IN THEORY, I could get sued personally for this - but still, I somehow don't care ...

schivmeister · 2008-01-22 15:08:04

The father of our Pacman didn't think about this. Because, there is no reason to think about this.

bionnaki · 2008-01-23 02:04:50

schivmeister wrote:

The father of our Pacman didn't think about this. Because, there is no reason to think about this.

I can see at the time it wouldnt be thought of as an issue, but what if arch gets as big as gentoo in the coming years? I think it's a feasible risk to consider - you never know if the owners of Pac-Man decide to launch a new version of the game and want to clear the market of those that infringe on their trademark and start sending out cease and desist demands (with the threat of lawsuit). This is entirely possible.

At the very least, pacman -V should be changed at some point to a more neutral graphic. The name pacman might be in a gray area, but pacman -V certainly isnt.

kensai · 2008-01-23 02:32:55

This discussion made me want to go to the arcades and play some Pac-Man.

jacko · 2008-01-23 02:33:20

bionnaki wrote:

schivmeister wrote:
The father of our Pacman didn't think about this. Because, there is no reason to think about this.
I can see at the time it wouldnt be thought of as an issue, but what if arch gets as big as gentoo in the coming years? I think it's a feasible risk to consider - you never know if the owners of Pac-Man decide to launch a new version of the game and want to clear the market of those that infringe on their trademark and start sending out cease and desist demands (with the threat of lawsuit). This is entirely possible.
At the very least, pacman -V should be changed at some point to a more neutral graphic. The name pacman might be in a gray area, but pacman -V certainly isnt.

I think Pac-man should be honored in that judd thought of them when he made up pacman -V, its free advertisement. U figured it out, did u not?

phrakture · 2008-01-23 17:26:49

fumbles wrote:

Copyright, trademark, same diff

This is emphatically not true. Copyright and trademark are very different beasts.

Zer0 · 2008-01-23 18:08:46

ILoveCandy anyone?

loosec · 2008-01-23 22:17:17

Same market, no. Competitor, no. Making money from this, no. Ofcourse C&D scare tactics may always be used since they most of the time are just scare tactics.

Rasi · 2008-01-24 10:06:44

loosec wrote:

Same market, no. Competitor, no. Making money from this, no. Ofcourse C&D scare tactics may always be used since they most of the time are just scare tactics.

Well well.. here in germany some bakery has been sued, because it was named as a football star. Well the owner had the same name, so what should he do?

john_schaf · 2008-01-24 10:39:49

Well well.. here in germany some bakery has been sued, because it was named as a football star. Well the owner had the same name, so what should he do?

Interesting, what happened at the end ?

arew264 · 2008-01-26 01:39:28

The fact is that before they start suing, they'll send some sort of cease and desist notice, and if that happens, action will be taken. Otherwise, it's just a waste.

raul_nds · 2008-01-26 02:15:02

I think it's a legitimate name

PACkage MANager xD

besides, we're doing them a favor...nobody plays pacman anymore. I didn't, until I installed Arch...

chaosgeisterchen · 2008-01-26 19:48:59

Rasi wrote:

Well well.. here in germany some bakery has been sued, because it was named as a football star. Well the owner had the same name, so what should he do?

Ridiculous. Here in Austria you are even bound to the law of having either an appropiate description of what your business offers or produces in the name or the name of (one of) the main stakeholders, being monetary fully responsible for all losses the business creates. I cannot think of suing someone because he has chosen a name which is legal by law.

Stoffi · 2008-01-27 02:29:50

some scottish fisher named Mc Donald got sued for selling his fish.
guess by who.

skottish · 2008-01-27 02:46:31

Microsoft crushed a kid named Mike Rowe because he named his website mikerowesoft:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/0 … index.html

It not like MS do something stupid. Way out of character...

Last edited by skottish (2008-01-27 02:46:57)

Zer0 · 2008-01-28 19:26:56

skottish wrote:

Microsoft crushed a kid named Mike Rowe because he named his website mikerowesoft:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/0 … index.html
It not like MS do something stupid. Way out of character...

Doesn't look like they actually sued him though, just a cease and desist. If he's brave enough he could fight it an probably win.. It's his f*%king name, that's just ridiculous. Then again the article doesn't say what the site contained I love how MS pours salt in the wounds by offering the kid $10 US for the domain, it's just a flat out insult!

jb · 2008-01-29 04:25:30

I thought that story was old... yeah the kid settled out of court. He decided to when it came to his attention that Microsoft is a multinational corporation with billions at their disposal for legal fees, and he was a 17-year-old from BC.

Heh, there's a wiki article about it.

Edit: Typo.

Last edited by jb (2008-01-29 04:27:18)

Crooksey · 2008-01-31 15:44:54

Zer0 wrote:

ILoveCandy anyone?

Yes, this is what I was thinking

/me start's vote for Yauort to be the new name for pacman

Arch Linux

#1 2008-01-22 06:32:53

"pacman"

#2 2008-01-22 06:44:44

Re: "pacman"

#3 2008-01-22 07:42:09

Re: "pacman"

#4 2008-01-22 08:04:51

Re: "pacman"

#5 2008-01-22 08:19:45

Re: "pacman"

#6 2008-01-22 09:02:05

Re: "pacman"

#7 2008-01-22 11:25:03

Re: "pacman"

#8 2008-01-22 15:08:04

Re: "pacman"

#9 2008-01-23 02:04:50

Re: "pacman"

#10 2008-01-23 02:32:55

Re: "pacman"

#11 2008-01-23 02:33:20

Re: "pacman"

#12 2008-01-23 17:26:49

Re: "pacman"

#13 2008-01-23 18:08:46

Re: "pacman"

#14 2008-01-23 22:17:17

Re: "pacman"

#15 2008-01-24 10:06:44

Re: "pacman"

#16 2008-01-24 10:39:49

Re: "pacman"

#17 2008-01-26 01:39:28

Re: "pacman"

#18 2008-01-26 02:15:02

Re: "pacman"

#19 2008-01-26 19:48:59

Re: "pacman"

#20 2008-01-27 02:29:50

Re: "pacman"

#21 2008-01-27 02:46:31

Re: "pacman"

#22 2008-01-28 19:26:56

Re: "pacman"

#23 2008-01-29 04:25:30

Re: "pacman"

#24 2008-01-31 15:44:54

Re: "pacman"

Board footer