from Hacker News

Comodo CEO Forum Post on Lets Encrypt Trademark

by LukeB_UK on 6/23/16, 9:56 PM with 81 comments

by markbao on 6/23/16, 10:32 PM
I'm cancelling my Comodo certs today. It's scary that this is the largest CA in the world.
Sibling comments have brought up some good points about the baseless claims in this post. The CEO also quotes this Let's Encrypt blog post on "Why 90 Days":
> "Ninety days is nothing new on the Web. According to Firefox Telemetry, 29% of TLS transactions use ninety-day certificates. That’s more than any other lifetime"
> so whose certs are these? Of course Comodo's!!! So they are admitting they are copying our innovation of 90 day free ssl certs!
So is the CEO saying that 29% of TLS transactions on the web are on sites which use Comodo's 90-day free trial SSL certificates, probably used on sites with the least traffic on the web? That at any one time, 29% of TLS traffic is over an unrenewable 90-day trial cert? Huh, seems implausible for some reason!
----
The post right above is also misinformed as well:
> From a legal standpoint (ISRG) should have trademarked this when they started using it publicly in November of 2014. There negligence to have done so is why this debate is happening. Then they want to cry foul because of their failure to follow the simplest of product protections. Registering your trademarks. The one who is in possession of the registered trademark is the owner, and that is the law.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but "from a legal standpoint," there has to be evidence of use in commerce before a trademark can be registered, and it's crystal clear that Comodo did not use "Let's Encrypt" in commerce, and it's also crystal clear that ISRG did.
by zackboe on 6/23/16, 10:12 PM
He states "We invented the 90 day free ssl. Why are they copying our business model of 90 day free ssl is the question! Comodo has provided and built a Free SSL model that give SSL for free for 90 days since 2007!"
I was curious because I had never heard of anyone providing free SSL other than StartSSL before Let's Encrypt (and Amazon).
It's a trial. No free renewals, manual or automatic.
"Free SSL certificates are valid for 90 days and are limited to one issuance per domain."
https://www.comodo.com/e-commerce/ssl-certificates/free-ssl-...
by mythz on 6/24/16, 12:37 AM
> When Lets Encrypt copied Comodo's 90 day free ssl business model, we could not protect it. Lets encrypt could have chosen 57 days, 30 days or any other number for the lifetime of their certificates. But they chose to use Comodo's 90 day Free SSL model that we established in the market place for over 9 years!!!
He's being disingenuous and intentionally misleading when he's trying to suggest LetsEncrypt stole their 90 day free SSL Cert business model as some kind of justification for his shady behavior of stealing someone else's trademark.
LetsEncrypt offers free SSL Certs forever, their short 90 days lifetimes is for added security of short duration of SSL certificates and to encourage certificate renewal automation. It has absolutely nothing to do with Comodo's freemium business model as he's trying to imply. I'd imagine he's fully aware of LetsEncrypt "always free" certificates since he's trying to steal the brand and goodwill that they've created. So his justification isn't anything more than a disingenuous PR stunt to cloud the issue behind his attempted brand theft.
by kevinsimper on 6/23/16, 10:51 PM
It is hilarious that he has to declare that "Comodo" is the good guys, while they are trying to trademark a term that they have never used! Oh the irony!
And that the CEO compares 90 days TRIAL to a 90 days unlimited renewals and thinks it is the same is just a sign on how big of a defeat they are facing!
by gregmac on 6/24/16, 2:08 AM
Obviously this whole thing is a reaction to the Let's Encrypt threat, which is that basically all simple certs (which are probably the vast majority of the market) are going to $0 cost.
What I don't get is what they hope to achieve? At best, if they were to win, there are two possible outcomes:
1: Let's Encrypt renames itself to something else, and continues issuing certificates.
2: Let's Encrypt folds, and a dozen clones pop up to take its place.
Either way, the simple certificate market still goes to $0.
Whether they win or not, they've managed to piss off the tech community (as in the people that obtain and install SSL certificates). We see this petty and futile move for what it is, and now on top of that, their CEO has shown they are basically at GoDaddy levels of sleazy, and has only reinforced to anyone paying attention to this that they do not want to be doing business with this company.
by mholt on 6/23/16, 10:18 PM
> since we are talking about protecting intellectual property, there is no law protecting business models. When Lets Encrypt copied Comodo's 90 day free ssl business model, we could not protect it. Lets encrypt could have chosen 57 days, 30 days or any other number for the lifetime of their certificates. But they chose to use Comodo's 90 day Free SSL model that we established in the market place for over 9 years!!!
That is not a business model. Besides, Google has been doing that for years now[1]. If this is in the name of justice in defending their business model, they should go after Google too.
Comodo has no innovation here.
> What they have is nothing new. We have been giving 90 day free certificates since 2007.
ACME is entirely new and original. It's even an open protocol, they themselves could implement it and gain a wider customer base! Why let LE be the only ACME CA?
Also their 90-day free certs don't renew for free.
> Actually consumer are less safe with their certificate because if it is used maliciously they don't revoke (Unmanaged)!
Unmanaged but 100% automated, which is 100% more than they can say. Automated processes are more standardized and more quickly executed than manual, managed ones. Also LE has proactively revoked several abused certificates[2] and has NOT broken browser security with bad extensions nor issued fraudulent certificates[3] as Comodo has.
> Lets get the facts right guys! We are the good guys that have been giving free SSL certificates since 2007 and managing them!
Sigh. CAs need to be working together at a time like this, not abusing trust and slinging mud.
Related discussion on LE forums: https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/about-the-defending-our-...
[1]: https://twitter.com/sleevi_/status/746099416864591873
[2]: https://community.letsencrypt.org/c/incidents
[3]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11962371
by MichaelGG on 6/23/16, 10:57 PM
How can someone so clueless be CEO of Comodo? Is he not aware how utterly and completely terrible he sounds? Pretending 90 day certs are a "business model" they invented? And that first to trademark is some sort of accomplishment?
If Comodo didn't have such a terrible reputation, I wouldn't believe this to be the actual CEO.
by bllguo on 6/23/16, 10:44 PM
> Lets get the facts right guys! We are the good guys that have been giving free SSL certificates since 2007 and managing them!
Rarely are self-proclaimed titles worth anything; I don't think this is any exception.
I think it's particularly laughable he calls 90 day Free SSL a business model. Or when he implies making it some other number of days would have been acceptable to him.
by tlrobinson on 6/23/16, 10:53 PM
I like how the CEO links to Let's Encrypt's post explaining the technical reasons for 90 day certificates [1], yet still thinks Let's Encrypt (a non-profit) "copied" their "business model" of offering free trial certificates.
1. https://letsencrypt.org/2015/11/09/why-90-days.html
by Alupis on 6/23/16, 11:59 PM
I wanted to post a rebuttal to the CEO's statements, however Comodo seems to not be approving new forum registrations today.
So, not only is Comodo living in a warped sense of reality, but they are not allowing any discussion to take place on their forums regarding this issue.
The CEO of Comodo likely knows the statements are highly delusional. I speculate they are driven by the intense fear of Let's Encrypt taking off in storm, driving a mass exodus of Comodo's paying customers.
Whether or not that's how reality will play out, I suppose we shall see. Instead of trying to adapt, Comodo's response is to try to squash it before it has a chance.
> We are the good guys
Sure you are...
by LukeB_UK on 6/23/16, 10:01 PM
Snapshot in case it changes: https://archive.is/GQumf
by kstrauser on 6/24/16, 12:11 AM
> We invented the 90 day free ssl.
Utter jackassery. I'm adding Comodo to my semi-permanent "never-do-business-with" list along with GoDaddy and Best Buy.
by boot13 on 6/24/16, 12:25 AM
Wow. So much wrong with that. I was already planning to switch from Comodo to LE for one client, but now I'm going make sure none of my other clients are using Comodo certs. Sorry, Comodo, but you're just hastening your demise with this kind of behaviour.
by vehementi on 6/23/16, 10:58 PM
That needs to be cross posted to r/cringe, I can barely read through his embarrassing posts.
by nlh on 6/24/16, 1:13 AM
What's even worse is one of the original posters on that thread ('sAyer' - a self-proclaimed paralegal)
> From a legal standpoint (ISRG) should have trademarked this when they started using it publicly in November of 2014. There negligence to have done so is why this debate is happening. Then they want to cry foul because of their failure to follow the simplest of product protections. Registering your trademarks. The one who is in possession of the registered trademark is the owner, and that is the law.
That is just deeply, totally, entirely wrong as far as the USA goes. I'm going to give this person the benefit of the doubt and just assume there's some i18n misunderstanding going on here, but in the USA, registration is a formality that's simply not required to afford trademark protection.
by jsmeaton on 6/23/16, 11:28 PM
Response boils down to "they didn't do it so we're legally allowed to". But WHY are you trying to Trademark that name other than to harm the Lets Encrypt business? If there's any other answer than harm towards Lets Encrypt I'd really like to hear it.
Despicable.
by gelatocar on 6/24/16, 2:49 AM
How come this keeps getting flagged and has dropped off the front page?
by JohnTHaller on 6/23/16, 11:02 PM
Comodo: Creating Distrust Online
I think we should all begin using this on social media. It's a play on their official "Creating Trust Online" tagline.
Maybe #CreatingDistrustOnline or #DistrustComodo
by criddell on 6/23/16, 11:20 PM
I really hate that his response is that the EFF should either use their scarce resources to fight them in court or else give up. I wonder if he kicks puppies in his spare time?
by curun1r on 6/24/16, 3:30 AM
Does anyone else find it humorous that this is happening between two CAs? It's always seemed to me that certificates (when combined with DNS) are almost the technical implementation of trademarks...proof of ownership over a name to prevent confusion on the part of consumers.
What's happening here is basically the legal equivalent of Comodo applying for a certificate for letsencrypt.org and claiming that it's okay because the people behind letsencrypt.org never did.
by vemv on 6/23/16, 10:25 PM
So, they want to copyright the number 90 as well? haha.
by chj on 6/24/16, 1:47 AM
HN, why aren't you using Lets Encrypt already?
by yumaikas on 6/24/16, 12:53 AM
This is really scummy behavior on then part of Comodo. I'm glad to not have had to do business with them. I suppose it does show how much Comodo is threatened by ISRG in this regard. It will be interesting to see if any of the big-corp sponsors offers to help ISRG with any legal fees that might come up, as this presents a large PR opportunity in the vein of Newegg patent troll fighthing.
by thoman23 on 6/24/16, 3:04 AM
Well now we know just how threatening Let's Encrypt is to the incumbent CA industry.
by 8rian on 6/24/16, 12:52 AM
community.letsencrypt.org
Is secured with Comodo.
by serge2k on 6/23/16, 10:39 PM
It's a 90 day free trial vs... free.
Ridiculous argument. Scummy as hell too.
by simbalion on 6/24/16, 2:35 AM
I've been following Let's Encrypt since 2014 and I am certain they had trademarked the name long before these Comodo applications were filed.
by coderdude on 6/23/16, 10:41 PM
Good luck, Comodo. You won't find any friends here. Not that I care either which way but I'm fairly positive I know what HN's copypastemind has decided well before this drama sprouted. Let's Encrypt is the new SSL Jesus.