Pushing Nonsense Using the Brand "Linux"
A trademark loses its potency if one fails to protect it. Ask Google about it... but don't "google it".
By those standards of law, the trademark "Linux" might already lack potency.
The abuse and misuse became rampant. People and companies hijack the name.
Like "Linux Gold" used to do decades ago*. This was published 2 days ago:
The founder of GNU/Linux recently explained why he does not like "crypto". He has a point.
There's also some person clearly misusing the 'Linux' mark for self-promotional purposes. This has gone on for years already and the Linux Foundation is not protecting the brand from this misuse, e.g.: (months ago)
Last year:
It has gone on like this almost every month for several years already. You search for Linux news and get some trans person instead.
What good is a trademark if you fail to enforce it? █
______
* In fact, someone recalled in 2011: "In order to call something Linux, one needs to request use of the trademark from Linux Mark Institute, the sole authorized agent for sublicensing the trademark. It's a fairly straightforward process. Of course, Linux is a trademark for only a limited field, leading to some interesting things like a penny stock called Linux Gold, a gold exploration company, which cropped up on searches for news about Linux."