[nas]

Not cool. I realize that companies feel like they have to protect their trademark, even in borderline cases. However, this seems like a boneheaded move for SPARC. People using SparkFun tend to be young techies, the kind of people who might go on to become the hardware purchasing decision makers in larger companies.

[NathanKP]

I appreciate SparkFun's response to the issue. I feel that it is very personal and down-to-earth. SparkFun is doing the right thing by telling their customers and the rest of the world about this pressure from SPARC. I'm sure that their loyal customer base will respond as well. The post writer even encourages them to email SPARC about the issue.

By the way, don't go to sparc(dot)org as linked to in the post. It is a malware/attack site. I think the intended link was sparc.com

[coderdude]

The humour being that Sparc has bigger fish to fry than people with "Spark" in their name.

[noonespecial]

Having been through this before (posted below), it occurs to me that Sun/SI may not have any idea whats going on here. This could all be the result of an overzealous paralegal just trying to make-work. There are likely geeks at Sun/SI who use and enjoy Sparkfun products. One well placed call to the right guy at Sun/SI could solve the whole thing. They could reach a $0 "settlement" where Sun/SI protects their mark by "taking action", and Sparkfun gets to go on and conduct business as usual.

On the other hand, as I said, if Sun/SI really wants that name, there is likely little Sparkfun can do to stop them taking it.

Edit: Fujitsu is also connected to SI as a founding member.

[timmaah]

That Sun/SI may not be behind it is B.S. and not an excuse. The law firm represents the person/corporation paying them. If SPARC doesn't want these sent out, they would tell the law firm or fire them and hire a new one.