PWG> Re: No more Bake-offs?

PWG> Re: No more Bake-offs?

Donald E. Eastlake 3rd dee3 at
Tue Jan 23 12:44:50 EST 2001

Do we really use that term very prominently?  I think these days it is
only used informally and "interoperability testing" or the like is
what our process documents refer to.  Why are we worried about this if
it hasn't been a problem?


PS: I think Pillsbury's lawyers don't have a case anyway but its
probably not worth going into the details of that as they could cause

From:  "Manros, Carl-Uno B" <cmanros at>
Message-ID:  <918C79AB552BD211A2BD00805F15CE85045E1344 at
To:  IETF-IPP <ipp at>
Cc:  pwg at, Scott Bradner <sob at>,
            IETF App-WG-Chairs
    	 <wg-chairs at>
Date:  Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:02:02 -0800
Content-Type:  text/plain;
>The Pillsbury company introduced the term Bake-Off in 1949 and has it as a
>registered trademark. They also own the web site
>Their lawyers have apparently recently started attacking other groups and
>organizations that use the word for very different purposes.
>See news article from today in the New Jersey Star-Ledger at:
>Any suggestions for another term that we can use in the future, or do you
>want to take on a fight with the Doughboy?
>Carl-Uno Manros
>Manager, Print Services
>Xerox Architecture Center - Xerox Corporation
>701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
>Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
>Email: manros at 

More information about the Pwg mailing list