Roland Olbricht wrote:
> This makes clear that neither the file name extension "osm" is 
> jeoparday. Or you do not want to discourage people from using 
> "osmium", "osmosis" or a range of other software.

I see your point there, but conversely I am really uncomfortable with the
OsmAnd situation.

It's evident (from IRC, help.osm.org, other non-OSM forums etc.) that a lot
of people assume OsmAnd is the official OpenStreetMap Android app. This is
already a problem in terms of support burden. It could potentially become a
problem for others building apps on OSM data (if users say "oh, no, I'd
rather use the official app") or by effectively encouraging mapping for this
official-sounding renderer. In brief, I don't believe we should have
permitted OsmAnd to use that name, though by now the ship has almost
certainly sailed.

How you formulate a policy that permits osmosis and osmium but not OsmAnd,
though, I have no idea.

Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Draft-Trademark-Policy-tp5900227p5900330.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Reply via email to