gonzopancho

You seem to not understand the difference between a fact "The disputed domain name <opnsense.com> was registered on April 8, 2014, and is not pointed to an active website." and an assertion or claim, "The Complainant further points out that the Respondent registered..."

How does bad faith exist when the domain "opnsense.com" was registered a full 8 months prior to the January 2, 2015 OPNsense announcement?

Point in fact, we published nothing. That website was not ours. We pointed the domain at it.

you also are ignoring this bit: ---

However, in contesting the Complainant’s supplemental submissions made by the Complainant to substantiate the asserted use of the trademark before the registration date of the disputed domain name, the Respondent introduces new elements which, in the Panel’s view, are relevant for the assessment of the Respondent’s position in this case and will thus be taken into consideration.

Indeed, in its Supplemental Filing, the Respondent states that a document submitted by the Complainant in its Supplemental Filing (as Annex 17) does not demonstrate the Complainant’s use of the trademark OPNSENSE but provides, instead, evidence of use of a trademark PFSENSE in which the Respondent has rights. The Respondent also informs the Panel that it is the manager of Electric Sheep Fencing LLC, a United States company which owns the United States trademark registration No. 3571276 for the trademark PFSENSE, registered on February 10, 2009 claiming first use as of February 19, 2005, for services in International class 42 relating to technical support services, maintenance and development of computer software; and of the International trademark registration No. 1176766 for the trademark PFSENSE, registered on August 28, 2013, for goods in class 9, including computer security software. The Respondent also states that its company Electric Sheep Fencing LLC has rights in a book referenced on the document submitted by the Complainant entitled “pfsense.org The Definitive Guide to the Open Source Firewall and Router Distribution”.

---

OPNsense were using the pfSense mark, and we were taking legal action to stop them.

I'm not lying.

From the URL

---

The Complainant is the owner of the European Union trademark registration Nos. 012771457 for OPNSENSE (figurative mark), filed on April 8, 2014 and registered on August 20, 2014, for goods in class 9, and 016287716 for OPNSENSE (word mark), filed on January 26, 2017 and registered on May 9, 2017, for goods in class 9.

The Complainant also owns the domain name <opnsense.org>, registered on September 4, 2014, at which it promotes and enables users to download its open-source OPNSENSE firewall.

The disputed domain name <opnsense.com> was registered on April 8, 2014, and is not pointed to an active website.

---

I want you to look closely at the date April 8, 2014, and then I want you to look for anything that occurred before that date, vs. all that occurred after.

We already have a linux-based product (TNSR).

Bringing that tech stack to a firewall is a logical move.

yes, I'm sure that FreeBSD actually does enjoy all of his work on OpenZFS and epoch-based reclamation.

the routers were based on the Vyatta stack.

The WiFi APs were not

nobody stole anything.

yes, I contracted with Matt Macy, and I'd do it again, but he's well-employed now.

Funny how you didn't complain about his current employment at AWS, or his previous work at iX Systems (trueNAS, primarily responsible for the port of ZFS on Linux to FreeBSD) or the fact that the whole epoch based reclamation in the FreeBSD kernel is based on his work.

the entire desktop line from Netgate is fanless.

ASICs require years to develop and aren’t flexible once deployed

When originally published they wouldn’t even ack Patrick Kelsey, the author of libuinet or that they had forked libuinet.

Now they say this: “Thanks to libplebnet and libuinet this work became a lot easier.”

F-stack is literally forked libuinet using DPDK instead of netmap.

The net-net is that Kelsey took his work private and tencent isn’t advancing the work.

Back in the day I was sponsoring work on libuinet in order to move enough of the kernel needed for a security appliance to libuinet to underpin a performance improvement for pfsense.

Then Tencent did what they did, Patrick reacted as he did and that was over.

We pivoted to VPP. But back in 2016 it also needed a lot of work.