>"OSI Certified" is a certification mark, a kind of trademark. Yet open >source software authors can claim their software to be "OSI Certified", >not just "equivalent to OSI Certified". This doesn't constitute >abandonment of the trademark -- does it? "OSI Certified" is a certification mark, a special kind of trademark that can ONLY be applied to third party software. In fact, if OSI itself made software it could NOT apply the certification mark to its own software. The same general rules of trademark apply: OSI is responsible for ensuring that third-party users of the OSI Certified certification mark meet certain quality standards -- in this case, the requirement to distribute the software under an OSI-approved license. /Larry Rosen
- RE: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Lawrence E. Rosen
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Eric Jacobs
- RE: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Dave J Woolley
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? phil hunt
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Brian Behlendorf
- RE: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Lawrence E. Rosen
- RE: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Dave J Woolley
- RE: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Eric Jacobs
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? John Cowan
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Lawrence E. Rosen
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Brian Behlendorf
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Frank LaMonica
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? John Cowan
- RE: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Brian Behlendorf
- RE: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Dave Gilbert
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? John Cowan
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Chloe Hoffman
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Brian Behlendorf
- Re: namespace protection compatible with the OSD? Dave Gilbert

