On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 08:12:25AM -0400, Derrick Brashear wrote: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Troy Benjegerdes <[email protected]> wrote: > > Have the USENIX association lawyers been made aware they are accepting > > funds in a manner which may expose them to trademark litigation from IBM? > > Either this trademark IS an issue, and blocks creation of a foundation, and > > ANYONE that accepts funds for doing work on 'OpenAFS' is potentially > > liable, or it's not. > > You asserting that doesn't make it true. >
Then what the hell *is* the deal with the AFS trademarks? Can I market a product as 'Compatible with OpenAFS'? If I submit code to Gerrit for an IPv6 implementation that afs3-std has not signed off on, is someone going to claim I'm violating IBM's trademarks and/or the copyrights on the .xg files? I would like to hear an opinion of the Usenix association lawyers, IBM's laywers, or Red Hat's lawers, as a public statement on this mailing list, rather than all the uninformed speculation all of us are doing about it. > > Is there a statement to what ends a donation to the Usenix openafs fund > > would be used for? > > Any purpose the Elders believe will further the ends of OpenAFS. Given > the low amount of money involved it has been things like > - procuring a 64 bit intel machine for a Linux port when such things were rare > - subsidizing (or guaranteeing against) cost overruns for AFS workshops I think the Elders have done a wonderful job ensuring the AFS workshops continue. Unfortunately, this appears to be all they are capable or willing to do, since there has been talk of a foundation for years, and the conclusion, as far as I can tell, was 'its too hard, with all the trademark/IBM license nonsense'. What is the official documented process for me to apply to be an AFS Elder and try to get some of this crap done? _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
