Letov then added a banner to the macOS port's website claiming the rebranding would happen "in coordination with Don Ho." Ho told The Register that no such coordination exists and that he has asked Letov to take the site down immediately. Letov requested a couple of weeks to transition to the new branding and a new domain, but Ho rejected this timeline, citing the continued risk of trademark infringement.
As of the time of publication, the macOS port's website remains live under the same domain but with the name “Nextpad++ for Mac,” and its own frog sprite logo.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News , or add us as a preferred source , to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Luke James is a freelance writer and journalist.\u00a0 Although his background is in legal, he has a personal interest in all things tech, especially hardware and microelectronics, and anything regulatory.\u00a0 ","collapsible":{"enabled":true,"maxHeight":250,"readMoreText":"Read more","readLessText":"Read less"}}), "https://slice.vanilla.futurecdn.net/13-4-23/js/authorBio.js"); } else { console.error('%c FTE ','background: #9306F9; color: #ffffff','no lazy slice hydration function available'); } Luke James Social Links Navigation Contributor Luke James is a freelance writer and journalist. Although his background is in legal, he has a personal interest in all things tech, especially hardware and microelectronics, and anything regulatory.
GenericUser2001 It seems that the Notepad++ creator is fully in the right here; it is completely reasonable that he does not want his name, or the main project name, attached to a port he is not actually involved with. Preventing confusion on who is creating what is exactly what trademark law is for. Reply
spadoop If I were Ho, I'd do the same, if not more and sooner. This Letov joker is obviously still trying to use Ho's name for a veneer of authenticity while playing innocent. Like, the original issue of using the logo, name, etc could be waved away as well-intentioned but naive. But the follow-up, where Letov is simultaneously dragging his feet while claiming coordination with Ho where none exists? Especially after Notepad++'s recent ordeal with hijacked updates? It screams either malice or deep deep stupidity, neither of which Ho would want anywhere near him or Notepad++. Reply
evermorex76 Just a question about open source software in general that maybe applies here. If someone does a port of your project, doing nothing but letting AI tools change what needs to be changed, and in the future does nothing but take the code for each update you publish and run it through the AI tools again, with no changes other than making it run on another OS, is that covered under the licensing? Or even if they actually do the work themselves, again not making any changes to functions or features or fixing any bugs, just porting? Is it considered creative modification that makes it a different piece of software or is it just a conversion but still the same application? If it's still the same software, is there a commonly accepted (or defined in licenses), measurable threshold that makes it different? Reply
chaos215bar2 evermorex76 said: Just a question about open source software in general that maybe applies here. If someone does a port of your project, doing nothing but letting AI tools change what needs to be changed, and in the future does nothing but take the code for each update you publish and run it through the AI tools again, with no changes other than making it run on another OS, is that covered under the licensing? Or even if they actually do the work themselves, again not making any changes to functions or features or fixing any bugs, just porting? Is it considered creative modification that makes it a different piece of software or is it just a conversion but still the same application? If it's still the same software, is there a commonly accepted (or defined in licenses), measurable threshold that makes it different? Any AI involvement here is completely irrelevant to the question of trademark infringement. The port is not done in association with the original project and does not have permission to use the name or logo of the original. OSS licensing covers source code. It does not give anyone permission to impersonate trademarks associated with a project they do not own. And regardless, AI is not just some magic black box you get to put a project through while somehow claiming it's a neutral representation of the original project's intent. That's a complete misunderstanding of how these tools work. This port is an entirely new project. Presumably Notepad++'s license allows its source to be used in this manner, but the resulting work is no longer "Notepad++" unless the owner of that trademark says it is. Reply
etoven Ow they do this c**p all the time .The entire os is nothing but a hodge podge of rebranded open projects. Its quite frankly discusting. So happy to see them take a stand for once. Reply
rezonant They should call it Objective Notepad. 🥁 Reply
Key considerations
- Investor positioning can change fast
- Volatility remains possible near catalysts
- Macro rates and liquidity can dominate flows
Reference reading
- https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/SPONSORED_LINK_URL
- https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/notepad-plus-plus-creator-threatens-legal-action-over-macos-port#main
- https://www.tomshardware.com
- New Adobe Premiere Color Grading Mode Accelerated on NVIDIA GPUs
- Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel backs $140M wave-powered AI data center startup — Panthalassa aims to run offshore compute nodes using ocean energy
- Apple considering Intel and Samsung for US chip production, report claims — consumer electronics giant looks to diversify supply chain amid chip shortages
- Keychain-size ‘GameCube’ uses genuine Nintendo silicon — system also includes a dock, design shared to GitHub
- Trump administration considers mandatory pre-release vetting of AI models — Anthropic's Mythos cited as catalyst for policy reversal
Informational only. No financial advice. Do your own research.