Interesting People mailing list archives
Intel Corp. & Legal Threats Against Intelligence Community
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 15:25:25 -0500
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 15:55:08 -0500 From: Ben N. Venzke <bvenzke () intelcenter com> Reply-To: osint () yahoogroups com To: osint () yahoogroups com Subject: <[osint]> Intel Corp. & Legal Threats Against Intelligence Community ------ As some of you may already know, Intel Corp. is currently pursuing legal action against all organizations, companies and entities that it can find which use the word "intel" or "intell" as an abbreviation for the word intelligence in their name or domain. Consequently, Intel is threatening us with legal action if we do not cease using our company name "IntelCenter" and our domain intelcenter.com. Under Intel's criteria of what they feel constitutes a violation of their trademark, Brooks Isoldi's Intellnet organization and the intellnet.org domain will also be in violation. According to Intel's argument as presented to us in two letters and from correspondence with others who are going through the same dispute with Intel, it does not matter that it is highly unlikely that someone will mistake a counterterrorism intelligence organization with a computer chip manufacturer. Intel maintains that the mere existence of an entity with that name dilutes the value of their mark. As those of us who are part of or have been part of the intelligence community know, the word "intel" and to a lesser extent "intell" have been around as an abbreviation for the word intelligence and in documented usage since the time of George Washington and perhaps even earlier. This considerably predates Intel's "creation" of the world "Intel" by combining the first part of integrated and electronics in 1968. Our first notification from Intel was received the day after the one year anniversary of 9-11 while trying to make sense of a barrage of terrorist threats during that tense period. Intel's lawyer was considerate enough to point out that Intel did not want to interfere with our "laudable goals or business in any way." However, Intel requested we "cease all use of IntelCenter as a name, trademark, domain name, or otherwise." I need your help. If you have any documented usage of the word "intel" or "intell" as an abbreviation for intelligence, please send me copies if possible. The older it is, the better. Also, I'm actively collecting letters supporting the argument that intel/intell is short for the word intelligence and in common usage. The more detail you can provide in the letter about your background and perspective on the issue the more effective it will be. You can email your letter to me at bvenzke () intelcenter com or fax it to 703-370-1571. Our snail mail address is below. It burns me that my company and all the other organizations fighting Intel Corp. need to be dealing with this now when we should be focusing all our energy on al-Qaeda and other threats to our country but apparently Intel is of the opinion that this is more important for us. Ben Venzke CEO ______________________ IntelCenter Voice (703) 370-2962 Fax (703) 370-1571 Email - information () intelcenter com Web - http://www.intelcenter.com PGP Public Key - available upon request PO Box 22572 Alexandria, VA 22304-9257 USA -------------------------- From: "berikoff () pop sk sympatico ca" <gberikoff () sk sympatico ca> Reply-To: osint () yahoogroups com To: osint () yahoogroups com Subject: RE: <[osint]> Intel Corp. & Legal Threats Against Intelligence Community Not sure if I have documented usage of the word intel but I served in the Canadian Forces for 12 years and intel was always used to refer to intelligence. if fact until your e-mail dated wed, 27 Nov 2002 I have never heard intel referred to as meaning integrated and electronics. Garrett Berikoff CD From: RUTWSGG () aol com Reply-To: osint () yahoogroups com To: osint () yahoogroups com, information () intelcenter com Subject: Re: <[osint]> Intel Corp. & Legal Threats Against Intelligence Community Guys: Don't know who to respond to, so hope this gets to the right folks. Thanks for the message regarding the attorney activity at Intel and the name of this list as it relates to the term "intel". I'm not a lawyer, but some common sense and a check back into history will reveal something of possible interest... Unfortunately, a legal precedent has already been set some years ago, so it appears that Intel may in fact be able to pull this off. This is nothing new, nor is it surprising. (It depends on what Intel has already done in the past, is doing now, and when). A similiar action was filed by the then Teletype Corporation against Kleinschmidt Laboratories, Mite Corporation, Lenkhurt, Lorenz, Siemens, Creed, Olivetti and other makers of "teletype" machines back in the late 40s, 50 and into the 60s involving the word "teletype". Teletype Corp also using the name "teletype" as it's corporate name, monicker, trade name, trade mark, and service mark was the manufacturer of teletypewriters. Specifically, teletypewriters made by Teletype Corp were called "teletypes". Like-machines offered and produced by other manufacturers had to be called "teletypewriters", instead of "teletype machines". Both the words "Teletype" (denoting the corporation), and "teletype" denoting Teletype Corp's product were given over to the Teletype Corp in a court action. The action - and the precedent, still stand today as a point of law. I'm not sure if Teletype Corp is still in business anymore, having been supplanted by computers many years ago. In any event, they have probably been absorbed, merged or bought out. Whoever its successors and assigns are STILL retains the rights to the original rulings, names, patents, trademarks, service marks, monickers, copyrights, etc. I am certain that Intel is aware of this case, so it might be worth researching from your end as well. One way to beat Intel at their own game of course, is to register the intel site's name before their action is completed. That's not a sure fire guarantee, but the idea is to beat them to it and then use the registration (or whatever) as further ammunition to fight your own case, since it would then pre-date theirs. Take solace in the fact that Intel is using the name as their corporate trade name, and we are using it for a source-type of information, so maybe a distinction can be drawn, although highly unlikely. I doubt that Intel Corp's action will have ANY effect on the US Govt's use of the word intel, or intell, since those entities are usually immune from such follow-on action. For us on this list, it's a different matter. Again, they might be able to pull it off in the private sector, since the precedent currently exists.......and that's the key to their whole case. Best bet is to start brain-storming for a new name just in case Intel enters the matter into court. Without a stated ownership interest in the Intel name or term (esp the "term" or "parlance", there's not much they can do about everyone else's usage until they can get a legal leg up. If they have patents or copyrights on ALL uses of the terms Intel, intel, or intell, or any variation of the word(s), to include their articles of incorporation, charters, etc, then maybe, but until then, -- it's iffy. Stay well. Hope this tidbit, while not good news, helps. Suggest checking out the legal history of the Teletype Corporation (Skokie, IL). I don't have it, but am well aware that it exists. Also check copyrights and patents on words... Happy Holidays, Dave -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor bisoldi () intellnet org http://www.intellnet.org Subscribe: osint-subscribe () yahoogroups com ------------------------------------------- johnmac -- It seems to me that there should only be proscription on using the term if either there might be confusion between the organization and the Intel Corporation or if it could be shown that Ben or Brooks were trying to capitalize on Intel's name through the use of this pre-existing term. Since neither of this is the case, common sense should dictate no case -- alas, common sense is not the law. Comments from some of our legal minds?? ********************************************************************** For Listserv Instructions, see http://www.lawlists.net/cyberia Off-Topic threads: http://www.lawlists.net/mailman/listinfo/cyberia-ot Need more help? Send mail to: Cyberia-L-Request () listserv aol com ********************************************************************** ------ End of Forwarded Message ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com To unsubscribe or update your address, click http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- Intel Corp. & Legal Threats Against Intelligence Community Dave Farber (Nov 29)