Received: from PACIFIC-CARRIER-ANNEX.MIT.EDU by po8.MIT.EDU (5.61/4.7) id AA28332; Thu, 27 Aug 98 19:31:26 EDT Received: from alphamb2.phys.vt.edu by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AA09230; Thu, 27 Aug 98 19:31:26 EDT Received: from localhost (siglercm@localhost) by alphamb2.phys.vt.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA15879; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:31:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:31:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Clemmitt Sigler To: Jeff Licquia Cc: pmitros@MIT.EDU, michael.mclagan@linux.org Subject: Re: LSA Site In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hi everybody, On Thu, 27 Aug 1998, Jeff Licquia wrote: > One thing I thought I should point out: Mike McLagan may have talked to an > attorney concerning the "Standard Linux" and "Linux" trademarks, but it > certainly wasn't the attorney who handled the "Linux" trademark issue with > Della Croce. > > How do I know? That attorney was G. Gervaise Davis, quoted by McLagan as > the lawyer who responded to him from Linux International. Davis was the > one who handled the Linus/WGS/LI/etc. side of that debate, and who > eventually got the trademark assigned to Linus. > > Therefore, it appears that McLagan lied to Clemmitt Sigler, unless there > are two G. Gervaise Davises involved with this case, or unless Davis is > severely screwed in the head and giving contradictory advice. > > I may be interpreting everyone's remarks improperly; thus the CC's. I'm > sure I'll be hearing from people if I did. :-) But as to the facts of the > case, I can provide proof upon request. As a follow-up to all concerned, I'd like to quote the exact words Michael McLagan used in his e-mail to me: "The same lawyer that took the case for Linus and LI gave me the advice I stated on those pages. Infact I hired him to handle a small trademark issue for me. Had I not had confidence in his advice, I would not have posted my comments regarding the legitimacy of the trademark. I still believe, despite having followig Linus personal request, that the mark is invalid." There can be no misinterpretation of these words. McLagan said that the above mentioned G. Gervaise Davis had been hired by him, and had also given him the advice that the Linux (R) mark was invalid. Does anyone have an e-mail address or other contact information for Mr. Davis? I would be happy to talk to him to try and verify what Mr. McLagan told me in his e-mail. Thanks for your time and trouble. Clemmitt Sigler