Subject: Re: a question that has been bugging me....

From: Nicolas Popp <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 16:58:16 -0700

Just to add some oil to the fire:

1. That's a great idea (you'll have a second career as a marketer, Michael)
2. Are we infringing on anything since the word is "go:" not "go"? (subtle
legal detail)
3. Since we are talking about an Open standard, no corporation would really
own that prefix, so is not that something that we can easily get away with?
(my naive French side...)

-Nico

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Koll [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 3:35 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: a question that has been bugging me....

Not to mention Compuserve "Go" words.

In a message dated 6/5/00 5:56:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email-masked]
writes:

> One possible issue to consider while
>  you're ducking stones is whether the "Go" network might feel infringed
upon.
>
>  Michael Mealling wrote:
>
>  > Could we possibly redefine the CNRP URI to
>  > have a URI scheme that's a little more palatable to the non-geek in the
>  > world? My specific suggestino would be "go:".
>

---

From: Michael Mealling <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 22:41:29 -0400

> 1. That's a great idea (you'll have a second career as a marketer, Michael)

Ick! They'll take away my geek card if I do that...

> 2. Are we infringing on anything since the word is "go:" not "go"? (subtle

I personally doubt it since 'go' is about as generic a term as you can
possibly get...

> (my naive French side...)

I'm not sure if that has much bearing other than it meaning that
ISOC would be the one who gets sued if someone claims infringement...

I'll check on it though.

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions       |          www.lp.org          |  [email-masked]

---

From: "Marshall L. Moseley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 10:27:47 -0700

According to the U.S. patent database, there is no patent on 'go,' relating
to Internet keywords, AOL, or CIS.

--Marshall

----- Original Message -----
From: Marshall L. Moseley <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: a question that has been bugging me....

> My intent is not to be a naysayer, but once AOL bought CIS, the two online
> services that used the term 'go' merged into one.  A smart attorney at
that
> point would apply for a use patent on the term.  There should be a patent
> database on the web; I'll try and find out.
>
> --Marshall
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Michael Mealling <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 7:41 PM

---

From: "Marshall L. Moseley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 22:53:24 -0700

My intent is not to be a naysayer, but once AOL bought CIS, the two online
services that used the term 'go' merged into one.  A smart attorney at that
point would apply for a use patent on the term.  There should be a patent
database on the web; I'll try and find out.

--Marshall