Agreed. This is something that we must address, and has been on our radar. We largely need to develop a reasonable trademark policy, similar to Jabber's perhaps, the affords productive and non-misleading uses of the mark without imperiling the integrity of things are OFFICIALLY sanctioned or sponsored by the OIDF.
Thanks for raising this issue again. If you could provide us with specific examples off-list where you're seeing confusing portrayals of the relationship between OpenID or OIDF and third-parties, that would be very helpful. Thanks, Chris On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Martin Atkins <[email protected]>wrote: > > In a bunch of places I see people thinking that openid.org is somehow the > "main", "default", "primary" or only OpenID provider. > > Clearly this is what the OpenID trademark is supposed to protect the OpenID > brand against. > > What can be done about this? > > > _______________________________________________ > board mailing list > [email protected] > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board > -- Chris Messina Citizen-Participant & Open Web Advocate-at-Large factoryjoe.com # diso-project.org citizenagency.com # vidoop.com This email is: [ ] bloggable [X] ask first [ ] private
_______________________________________________ board mailing list [email protected] http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
