On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 02:58:55PM -0700, John Plocher wrote: > Are you referring to the OpenSolaris Organization (which is made > up of the OGB and the various Communities) or a specific Community > within the organization?
The former, as defined by the very first sentence of the Constitution: 1. "This Constitution defines the operational bylaws of an organization, to be known as the OpenSolaris Community... OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) to manage and direct the OpenSolaris Community..." "The OpenSolaris Organization" doesn't seem to be used or defined anywhere. > If the former, where do you derive the right or obligation of the > organization's membership (as a whole) to "decide" anything (other > than OGB membership and constitutional issues) outside of the > Community Group structure? Only the CGs have the authority to This would be from 4.1, power 3 (guidance to the OGB) if the OGB requested such guidance or the Members wished to offer it, or 9 (Amendment) if the OGB were to opine that the designations in question were not within the OGB's authority to issue, or that they should not be issued, and a majority of Members disagreed. > Not even the OGB has the power to make decisions for a community > group: Agreed and understood; the central point of my contention is that an exclusive claim to a special designation involving the OpenSolaris adjective is a matter for the OpenSolaris Community, not any one Group (sometimes called a Community as in the pre-Constitutional nomenclature), and as such falls to the OGB to decide. That Sun holds the trademark means two things: 1. Sun's permission is *also* required to use the name in a manner governed by trademark law, and 2. Sun may be legally permitted to use the mark, or license it to others without the OGB's or the Constitution's permission, and because the Charter gives us no ownership or control of the mark, we have no legal recourse. However, for Sun to imply that The OpenSolaris Community has endorsed a product by assigning its name to it, without the Community's approval, could be interpreted as a breach the terms of the Charter. What that means, I don't know. And I don't really want to find out. This is yet another reason OpenSolaris should have been called Mumblix or whatever trademark-free name from the beginning. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!"
