It seems that the Linux Foundation has decided that both “systemd” and “segmentation fault” (lol?) are trademarked by them.

  • roguetrick@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just like champagne only comes from the champagne region of France, true segmentation fault only comes from a linux program shitting itself.

    • bluGill@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Linux is the imposter here. Segmentation fault refers to how the PDP-(I forget) hardware organized memory. It comes from the original unix implementation which linux has never had any part of.

      • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        They aren’t satinf they have a trademark on the phrase ‘ segmentation fault’. They are saying the artwork called ‘segmentation fault’ contains a trademarked image/logo/whatever

      • squiblet@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It doesn’t matter because trademark law is about usage and active protection of rights, not origination.

        • bluGill@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          It does matter because projects like *BSD can prove continuous usage of the term. As such either the trademark is easy to break (it is common use), or it can only be a trademark in very specific contexts that are unlikely to apply.

      • deur@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        x86 and x86_64 still have segment registers so it’s not exactly entirely archaic, but they’re not really relevant so that doesnt change what you said. I dont have the exact details on who implemented segmentation first, so I cant elaborate on that.