On 8/8/06, Ben Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nope- not kidding. I was pretty pissed when they started hounding me about it. I spent about two months arguing via email with the campus groups person. I even looked up the trademark to verify that they weren't lying. It's total BS, but the bottom line is that they own it, and furthermore, they give us money.
What has changed? I'm not certain. Some asshole bureaucrat was probably just bored some afternoon. I couldn't get a straight answer out of them as to why now, and why we weren't informed of this when we started using it years ago.
They'd have a hard time arguing trademark on that one, but it could happen. The reason I like UMLUG at Maryland Linux Users group is that we're still using Uxxxx at Maryland- which will probably piss them off, but we can still use it.
I thought the same, but when I looked at the constitution, it turns out that voting on amendments is different from voting for officers. Article VII says that it takes a 2/3 majority vote from the active membership and the active membership includes UMCP students, staff, and faculty. Voting for officers is restricted to UMCP undergrads. I'm not certain if this is in line with SGA policy, but they haven't yet rejected our constitution due to it, so we might as well stick with it.
~John
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 11:29:15PM +0000, John Demme wrote:
> I am hereby proposing an amendment to UMLUG's constitution.
> The preamble would be changed from:
> "We, the members of the UM Linux Users Group (UMLUG), do hereby
> establish this Constitution in order to provide support for users of
> the free operating system, Linux."
> To:
> "We, the members of the UMLUG at Maryland Linux Users Group (UMLUG),
> do hereby establish this Constitution in order to provide support for
> users of the free operating system, Linux."
> Rationale:
> Unfortunately, "UM" is a university trademark, and we will probably
> not be allowed to renew our SGA registration using this name. The new
> recursive name was suggested ( by Mathias, I think ) and will allow us
> to continue under "UMLUG".
You have got to be kidding. When we went for SGA funding several years ago,
they yelled at us long and hard until we changed "University of Maryland" to
"UM." "UM" is a university trademark?
Nope- not kidding. I was pretty pissed when they started hounding me about it. I spent about two months arguing via email with the campus groups person. I even looked up the trademark to verify that they weren't lying. It's total BS, but the bottom line is that they own it, and furthermore, they give us money.
What has changed? I'm not certain. Some asshole bureaucrat was probably just bored some afternoon. I couldn't get a straight answer out of them as to why now, and why we weren't informed of this when we started using it years ago.
I suspect that this means that in seven years, "$foo at Maryland" will be
rejected by the then-sitting SGA. However, that will not be the current
officers' problem.
They'd have a hard time arguing trademark on that one, but it could happen. The reason I like UMLUG at Maryland Linux Users group is that we're still using Uxxxx at Maryland- which will probably piss them off, but we can still use it.
> And Article V, Section 4, bullet point 3 changed from:
> "If any normal office, other than President, be vacant, the President
> shall have the power to appoint an existing officer to hold the vacant
> office until the next election."
> To:
> "If any normal office, other than President, be vacant, the President
> shall have the power to nominate an active member or existing officer
> to hold the vacant office until the next election. Said nominee will
> be voted into the position by a simple majority at the next meeting"
> Rationale:
> The current constitution does not allow adding officers, only changing
> their positions. If we are interested in adding officers (we have
> only two for this year) this change is necessary.
> Please send your votes to [1]umlinux@gmail.com. Sorry, only UMCP
> students, faculty, and staff are considered active membership.
Did this change? It used to only be undergrads who could vote.
I thought the same, but when I looked at the constitution, it turns out that voting on amendments is different from voting for officers. Article VII says that it takes a 2/3 majority vote from the active membership and the active membership includes UMCP students, staff, and faculty. Voting for officers is restricted to UMCP undergrads. I'm not certain if this is in line with SGA policy, but they haven't yet rejected our constitution due to it, so we might as well stick with it.
~John
