On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Justin Erenkrantz <justin at erenkrantz.com> wrote: > The fundamental problem, as I see it, is that the policy is inverted. > OpenSolaris never got its act together to permit a naming scheme > blessing releases with a name - so Sun unilaterally instituted their > own policies. So, what I'd recommend is trying to draft a policy that
Why would anyone but the trademark holder be legally allowed to draft a policy for the usage of its name? As I've come to understand it, Sun always has to establish the trademark usage as the owner. We are welcome to provide feedback, but expectations beyond that are unrealistic. > something) that doesn't do a disservice to SchilliX, Nexenta, etc. It is subjective at best whether it is a "disservice." > They were all present long before Project Indiana, and it seems sad > that Sun can come along and take the name. If I were involved with How can they "take" something they never gave away? > Nexenta or whatever and told from the beginning that the OpenSolaris > name was off limits and Sun comes along and takes it for their > project, that'd be a grace insult and I hope Sun management > understands that. That's an unreasonable expectation of a commercial company. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben
