>On Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 01:35:54PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>> I would suggest that until someone from MIPS legal specifically raises an
>> you don't worry about it. With the sparc people they were quite happy with
>> Linux/sparc - which denotes Linux for sparc systems (they objected to
>> sparclinux as that implied it was their product). In fact given the "/" is
>> 'for' then I don't think there is even a valid trademark issue to be raised.
>> Its also not in MIPS interest to cause trouble. Its a product for their
>> system. If they started being silly then everyones lawyers would be advising
>> them to pull their "xyz product for mips" as a legal precaution.
>I wouldn't expect MIPS to create any legal problems for anybody; you should
>consider this no more than an advice.
Exactly. The point is that there are two different concepts to be represented
in the kernel for which we risk having a name collision, and that the
of the trademark provides an argument somewhat stronger than a coin toss
for resolving it one way and not the other.