2018/6/29 3:03:09 -0700, volker.simo...@gmail.com: > This still doesn't explain why replacing one trademark with another > one is helpful here.
Perhaps some trademarks are more important than others. > After Phil's remark, OpenJDK doesn't even seem to be registered as a > trademark, so in that sense the old version "Building the OpenJDK" > seemed to be even more trademark law compliant. I’m not qualified to engage in a legal argument, in this or any other forum, and neither is Phil. In this matter I am following the advice of Oracle’s legal department regarding the usage of Oracle’s trademarks. > And by the way, I totally agree with Aleksey that changes shouldn't be > pushed if reviewers raise concerns (at least not before these concerns > have been addressed). My apologies. I had no idea this would turn out to be such a volatile issue. - Mark
