On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 01:35, Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Simple review: the original email was sent by Dan Peterson from his >> google.com address. I imagine that if Google had a problem with it, >> then he wouldn't be working there tomorrow :-D ... or if this was some >> kind of spurious one-guy-goes-batshit-crazy, then how could he line up >> so many people? >> >> And sure, while you couldn't know this, Dan is a great guy. I worked >> with him while at Google. This proposal is straight-up. >> >> My simple point is: please accept proposals at face value rather than >> pushing back with paranoid thoughts about malfeasance on the part of >> the people wanting to join our efforts here at the ASF. > > Yet, we have in the past had similar situations, where we have not > allowed this kind of position. In the end, you are now encouraging > that Apache WAVE, Google WAVE and Niclas WAVE are totally fine, > possibly not the same thing. > LucidImagination is told that "LucidWorks for Lucene" is a proper > 'association' back to the Apache project. Shouldn't they (in the same > spirit) then be allowed "Lucid Lucene" as well? > Didn't we require Yahoo TrafficServer to assign trademark, or we would > change the name? > Doug Cutting assign trademark to Lucene? > > Although I agree with you, Greg, that if Google has a problem, this is > likely not happening. My point is the reverse; If we allow "Google > Wave", "Niclas Wave" and so forth, we need to allow this for the > Lucenes, Hadoops and TrafficServers as well, otherwise 5 years down > the line, you need to go researching each and every projects history > to figure out how derived products may call themselves. I think it > severely complicates Trademark policies and blurs our definitions. > > > -1 to the proposal as it stands with this name and 'Google retains the > trademark "Google Wave"'
In general I agree with Niclas. This clause should be removed. I seem to recall podlings where the donating company was required to transfer trademarks, but don't remember exactly which podling/project it was. I wouldn't stop the proposal, though. This can be identified as an issue to be solved in Incubation - either by changing the name away from 'Wave' or by transferring marks or even by determining that none of both is required. Bernd PS: It would've been much better to first [DISCUSS] the proposal before putting it up for vote. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
