From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay04.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (relay04.roc.ny.frontiernet.net [66.133.131.37]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D7C02BC0F for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:43:03 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <001501c4b16d$e7ab4790$0301a8c0@chuck2> From: "Mark Chambers" To: "Matt Porter" References: <065ACD8E84315E4394C835E398C8D5EB865270@COSSMGMBX02.email.corp.tld> <20041013132613.A21277@home.com> <00d001c4b166$04a06ea0$0301a8c0@chuck2> <20041013135444.B21277@home.com> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 17:44:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Cc: Embedded PPC Linux list Subject: Re: "I2C" versus "IIC" List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > I was talking about the trademark infringement. You are talking about > something completely different, Well, actually I was talking about both issues, but here's what I think about Philips patenting i2c: It's great work if you can get it. And I think I'm going to wrap it up for the day, and if i2c is still here when I get up in the morning I'm going to throw it out on its ear. Mark