OT: Trademark misuse

... snip ...

FYI K&R2 is effectively the last draft of C89. MISRA is not an ISO standard.

So, for example, discuss it here on c.a.e. The c.l.c. policy is long-standing, and will probably not be changed. comp.programming is also very tolerant, but has a much smaller traffic level. comp.unix.programmer is also available.

As long as useful alternatives exist, it is silly to simply try to reduce all to the same level. Then the groups become pointless competitors, in place of areas that concentrate.

... snip ...

Fine. Then you are not cluttering c.l.c with off-topic material. Instead you inhabit new-groups of interest to you.

... snip ...

I suspect anything addressed to "Roman

??? What does this have to do with no resale? If goods are damaged, it could have happened at any step along the way -- manufacturer, distributor, reseller,...

MISRA-C "which is effectively" a standard is more widely used than C99 :-)

and you "permit" K&R 1, K&R2 and ANSI C and C89 "which is effectively" a draft.

You make it up as you go along. MISRA-C is more relevant than either K&R at this time,

NO it isn't. It is only "long standing" with a small group of net nannies on clc. Many disagreed last time it was brought up on CLC and the majority continue to ignore you on this which is why there are so many net nanny posts say "you cant post that here".

You surprise me. Unless this was intended as humour?

Steve

Roman clearly did say "URL". I see no implication there for using the URL as part of a mail address.

Steve

just beat me to it Steve. :-)

Don...

I was mostly just passive reader and much of the noise in c.l.c. was created by yourself.

OK, you guys have a point. I guess that email addresses is just the way my mind works.

CBF, by getting the feedback I meant in c.a.e. I provided the URL to invite whoever interested to check my corrections to discussed infringement.

My email address is available in my posts. As wild as it seems, it is live email, which will be valid until I start receiving unreasonable amount of spam on it.

You are right, those assumed email addresses don't exist.

Roman

In article , Steve at fivetrees writes

Not at all. I would suggest that MISRA-C is in far more wide spread than either the K&R 1 or 2 "standards" Virtually all C compilers in use are at least C95 these days.

... snip ...

... snip ...

No sweat. It was basically a warning.

Permit me to lobby against undue hyperbole: in my shop, K&R 1 & 2 are the compilers in use (C89/C90) on most all projects and I suspect a careful survey of non-desktop-os environments will turn up a lot more users like myself.

Regards,

Michael

Given that I have some idea who is using MISRA-C I think you will find you are in the minority.

Also as I supply a wide range of compilers I have some idea what a lot of people are using. There is the odd one ore two who will be using very old compilers but any compiler less than a decade old will be C95 and many less than 15 years old will not be pure C90

MISRA -C is based on C90 with A1 and the two TC's These were produced, from memory in 1992/3.

So any pure C90 or K&R2 compiler in use are going to be very uncommon. As for K&R1.....

In any event it does not negate the fact that MISRA-C is as important to the C community as any of the ISO standards.

That is a question better addressed to Atmels legal dept. (See my signature)

True, but the distributor you are buying from, needs to understand what is to be gained by you exposing their name. The risk is that people call them to have them sort out your problem. If you are an unknown entity to them, it is no surprise that the guit reaction is NO.

If they make more profit selling 1 piece to 500 customers then 500 pieces to 1 person, then you *are* hurting them.

You do not have to use their name, you can print a catalogue where you have your own order number and then you can in your ordering system convert from your order number to other order numbers. This is of course a much more costly affair than the procedure you are using now, but this is as you probably understand totally dependent on that other company spending a lot of money.

It is also a matter of brand recognition. Some companies want 100% control over how their name is used.

Personally, I think that it is good for a microcontroller company to have companies which reduces the cost for hobbyist/low volume users and would encourage such activities, but usually an agreement/discussion before that happens is a good idea.

then perhaps Atmel shouldn't have resellers, and avoid this potential hazard that you have suggested, and brought to our attention. Sell direct to the public. :-)

Don...

Please do not interpret my comments as Atmels view on how to do things. You asked me for an official Atmel opinion, and I told you that the only ones that can provide you with an official Atmel opinion is the Atmel legal department.

That does not mean that I think that you should not keep on doing what you are doing. I am well aware of several companies in my region which are reselling Atmel silicon, and I do not mind that. Typically they are working together with an official Atmel distributor which sees this as a way of doing increased business, and a way to avoid having to deal with companies buying in twos and threes.

Roman is not working with the official distributor and is still using their name, and that is causing them concern.