"Design by Contract is a registered trademark[1] of Interactive Software Engineering, Inc. in the United States"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract

Does Digital Mars has permission for ISE to use the DBC trademark? This is not an attack to the D language but I was just curious if Walter had spoken with someone at ISE about it.

"Lurker" <lurker@mailinator.com> wrote in message news:gkanpu$2l9f$1@digitalmars.com...
> "Design by Contract is a registered trademark[1] of Interactive Software Engineering, Inc. in the United States"
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract
>
> Does Digital Mars has permission for ISE to use the DBC trademark? This is not an attack to the D language but I was just curious if Walter had spoken with someone at ISE about it.

Meh, with intellectual property these days, you can't open your mouth or even think without stepping on someone's IP. I wouldn't be surprised if foreach and do...while are "owned" by someone. I already know "orange" is owned by a company, and "apple" is owned by two different companies.

Lurker:
> "Design by Contract is a registered trademark[1] of Interactive Software Engineering, Inc. in the United States"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract
> Does Digital Mars has permission for ISE to use the DBC trademark? This is not an attack to the D language but I was just curious if Walter had spoken with someone at ISE about it.

Just changing the name may solve the problem.

Bye,
bearophile

"Lurker" <lurker@mailinator.com> wrote in message news:gkanpu$2l9f$1@digitalmars.com...
> "Design by Contract is a registered trademark[1] of Interactive Software Engineering, Inc. in the United States"
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract
>
> Does Digital Mars has permission for ISE to use the DBC trademark? This is not an attack to the D language but I was just curious if Walter had spoken with someone at ISE about it.

According to that page the term was coined in 1988, but they never applied for a trademark on it until 2003. I'm no lawyer, but how valid could that possibly be? Yea, it was granted in 2004, but at least in the US, being granted an IP doesn't mean it's actually valid - that's deliberately left for courts to decide (for better or worse). And yea, maybe they could sue, but again, at least in the US, you don't need a valid case in order to sue someone and make them settle, all you have to do is make up some BS and hire a lawyer (just look at the old Hasbro Interactive's practices.)

Lurker wrote:
> "Design by Contract is a registered trademark[1] of Interactive Software Engineering, Inc. in the United States"
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract
> 
> Does Digital Mars has permission for ISE to use the DBC trademark? This is not an attack to the D language but I was just curious if Walter had spoken with someone at ISE about it.

That's why D uses the term "contract programming" instead.  Though personally, I think ISE shot themselves in the foot by trademarking this term, since it's discouraged people actually writing about or using the technique.


Sean

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Lurker" <lurker@mailinator.com> wrote in message news:gkanpu$2l9f$1@digitalmars.com...
>> "Design by Contract is a registered trademark[1] of Interactive Software Engineering, Inc. in the United States"
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract
>>
>> Does Digital Mars has permission for ISE to use the DBC trademark? This is not an attack to the D language but I was just curious if Walter had spoken with someone at ISE about it.
> 
> According to that page the term was coined in 1988, but they never applied for a trademark on it until 2003. I'm no lawyer, but how valid could that possibly be?

A trademark is valid if you treat it as a trademark and defend its use. It can be invalidated if it is too broad, or too obvious a term for what it is used for. It can also be invalidated if it *becomes* a generic term for what it is used for (xerox, bandaid, kleenex...).