On Nov 1, 2007, at 13:35, James Carlson wrote:
> For instance, one direct effect is that prior to Indiana, a project
> was "in OpenSolaris" if it went through the established community
> endorsement process, and no other change was needed. Now that
> "OpenSolaris" is a distribution, the Indiana project team gets to pick
> and choose among other projects to be granted "OpenSolaris" inclusion,
> and needn't take the work product of all of them -- or could even
> modify ("hack") some as part of constructing the distribution.
I don't agree with that. Prior to the start of the current trademark
discussions, there was only a fair-use right for /anything/ to
associate itself with OpenSolaris. That right can't be taken away.
It's up to us to work together to make the trademark guideline[1]
what we want it to be (while making sure that the people with
responsibility in law for the trademark are able to approve it).
It's an opportunity to do a new thing collectively and I'm hoping all
the stop-energy I've seen today will soon change into do-energy. We
have the "running code" (in both the alpha release and the name),
it's time to iterate.
S.
We reject: kings, presidents and voting.
We believe in: rough consensus and running code.
-- David Clark, http://ietf20.isoc.org/videos/
future_ietf_92.pdf, p.19
[1] http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php?
title=Trademark_usage_and_Branding_guideline
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
