Summary of my arguments _pro_ name change

[Andrew Turner]

Consider me won over too. I think it just needed a bit of time for me
to think about it, as well as Markey's rather good list.

As for Oldfield waging war, I think we are safe. You can't copyright
names, only trademark then. And as for that, I don't personally
believe that an album name is likely to be trademarked - Oldfield's
Amarok is hardly a brand. Even if it were trademarked, I can't see
much potential for confusion, which I believe is one of the metrics
for infringement. Add into that its age, and I doubt anybody would
care anyway. I would also speculate that amaroK and Amarok would be
considered to have rather similar levels of infringement, making this
is a moot point with respect to the name change.

Andrew

On 01/06/06, Jocke Andersson <ajocke at gmail.com> wrote:
> I finally agree with you guys about changing the name... amaroK is fun, but
> with the growing user base, it's not very serious...
> Amarok is more serious, but you'r sure we won't have any copyright problems
> about it? (Thinking about the Oldfield ablum) :P
>
> Count me in to the pro side. Should we rename roKymotion too, while we're at
> it? ;)
>
> //Firetech
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok mailing list
> Amarok at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok
>