On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Matthew Hardeman <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Ryan Sleevi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> So Apple Computer is misleading to customers of Apple Records, and Apple >> Records is misleading to customers of Apple Computer, is that the argument? >> In which case, no one named "Apple" should a certificate, right? >> >> > Your example is perfect support for my position. > > Apple Computer and Apple Records have a long and well published animosity > between them over sharing the name, but between lawsuits and settlement > actions have managed to arrive at agreement where both can be Apple for > certain uses and in certain scopes. > > What does the average internet user expect Apple to refer to? Yep - Apple > the computer / iPhone people. Want it to say Apple? It needs to be them. > > If Apple Records wants an EV certificate that clearly says Apple Records I > think that's clearly different enough that they should be able to. But > not Apple, that's perverse to simple common everyday expectation. > In this example, I believe the EV certs would contain O = "Apple, Inc." and O = "Apple Corps Ltd", or at least O = "Apple Records (Apple Corps Ltd)" _______________________________________________ dev-security-policy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
