On Thu, 2008-06-03 at 08:25 +0100, Mirko Lindner wrote: > I am not sure but I think there is no legal limitation to using an > abbreviation such as fsfc and it not meaning Free Software > Foundation > Canada...
My argument is that _if_ we are supporters of free software, and care at all about the Free Software Foundation, _then_ we have a *moral duty* to maintain good relations with the FSF. I'm sure no-one here thinks otherwise, and expect I am actually over-clarifying the obvious to most of you. <pointing at elephant> Bouncing our ideas off the FSF people, before we actually start anything, should be enough for now. This should not be particularly hard to do. Moreover, the only substantive reason for using the 'fsf' name is to identify ourselves closely with the FSF. We have a duty to let them know we intend that. Part of my concern was that the FSF does not appear to have considered the proliferation of the 'fsf' acronym into country namespaces, and that we should cordially ask for their thoughts on our use of it. Starting by joining their 'groups.fsf' thing seems ideal. I'm also concerned that I not accidentally lead us into a meta-discussion, or deal solely with hypothetical situations. So, let me just answer the question Mirko asked -- which is worth asking and an answer.... Legally speaking, there is no particular restraint on what we do with the domain. The extension of trademark ownership to domain names appears to be, in what lawsuits I am aware of, case-by-case and quite limited.(0) So, if we went with a purely legalistic view -- where we decide that the name is available and it would be advantageous to us (perhaps because of the Google hits from people searching 'fsf') and it didn't matter what the FSF thought -- then there is no serious legal restraint on our activities. We can assume that if we don't misbehave or anger anyone, we will not have to be 're-niced' by any lawyers. Note also that we are not restrained in any way from using a different domain name.(1) We seem to be very interested in establishing some very clear association with the FSF. Now (with apologies to lawyers), what is legal and what is moral -- or sound organizational practice -- are not the same. I personally would rather not read the news headline, "Stallman Alarmed by Canadian Upstarts". Waiting to see what the FSF might consider worthy of a lawsuit would be, IMHO, disgraceful. I expect there might just be some confusion about what I wrote, which if summed, might be "Let's tell them what we want to do, and see if they can help". That we need to work out what we want to do, first, is a given. That we use fsf.ca to do what we want is not. All the very good things, David 'Not a Lawyer' Henry Notes: 0. CIPPIC's 'Domain Name Disputes' FAQ: http://www.cippic.ca/domain-name-disputes/ 1. I read this morning that the .ca namespace is now at one million registered domain names. But still, I'm sure there are many other domain names available. _______________________________________________ fsfc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfc-discuss
