> In short, no vote == problem. I must apologize beforehand that I have read only a small portion of the posts (don't really feel like to), thus my comment may sound like that of an idiot. I know this argument was advanced by several posters (one of them even ridiculed my ignorance by asking "Is that so difficult to understand", or something to that effect). But I think many of us were letting our emotions get the better of our common sense.
Sun owns the trademark "Open Solaris". I don't know how things were arranged, however, it is reasonable to assume that the OpenSolaris.org must have acquired a license, either explicitly or by implication, to use the mark Open Solaris or OpenSolaris. Unless it is specifically provided, this license is not exclusive, nor will it be sub-licensible. As the mark owner, Sun has an obligation to ensure that the goods and services provided by the OpenSolaris.org conform to certain standards, and Sun can always revoke this license, and/or take other necessary actions, if such standards are not complied with. OpenSolaris.org can pass its own constitution, but, since you cannot give yourself a greater right than you already have, this constitution, however it is worded, is always subject to Sun's power to exert its ownership control. Since this license is not exclusive, Sun can grant the right to use the OpenSolaris mark to another entity, in this case, the Indiana project. Conceivably, someone who claimed to be community leaders may not like what might have been perceived as having some hankypanky between Ian and Sun when the former was hired by the latter. But to outsiders (myself included), since there exists very little connect between the de jure community leaders and those little mortals of us, this can be easily confused as being sour grapes. Ian might have been a beneficiary, but he is definitely not the villain. If anything, Sun's legal department is (for granting someone else to use the OpenSolaris mark). Many of the dissenters are obviously barking at the wrong tree. But the more troubling issue, at least where I stand, is the prevalent belief that because there was no vote, there is problem (& thus justification for the lynching). As I mentioned above, I don't think Sun has granted the OpenSolaris.org the power to sub-license the OpenSolaris mark. Without this grant, the "board", whatever this term may mean, would have made a big joke of itself if it indeed allowed such a vote to take place. (That is, if the vote is yes, the board will embarrassingly find itself in no position to grant someone else the right to use the mark; OTOH, if the vote is no, the board will similarly find itself having no power to stop Sun from allowing someone else to use the mark.) In sum, my main point is: disconnect == representation without delegation. Of course, the board members can convene for a symbolic vote to let their hurt feelings known. As I don't see Moinak's name among the whiners, frankly, my friend, I don't give it a damn. > > I am sorry that my bird sized brain only allows me > to see things in black and white, or good guys versus > bad. This undoubtedly caused me to fail to see > things that are "so easy to understand" (my would-be > but won't-be-bothered response to a separate post), > and thus miss "the point" entirely. Someone from the > OGB can call me stupid (as someone did in a separate > post), > > Someone did? I didn't see that happen. Just to make > sure, I re-read > my response to your earlier posting, and I see only a > discussion of > the claims you've made, and not a word about you > personally. > > > but, unfortunately, he (there is no she in the OGB) > cannot stop me from doing the "perceiving". > > I agree that we need a more diverse leadership in > _many_ ways -- in > terms of affiliation, geography, background, and, > yes, gender. As > it's an elected position, though, the only remedy I > can suggest is to > encourage more people to run and for core > contributors to think hard > about where to cast their votes. > > -- > James Carlson, Solaris Networking > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 > 442 2084 > MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N > Fax +1 781 442 1677 > _____________________________________________ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > [email protected] This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
