> On Aug 20, 2015, at 10:16 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> This thread started as a discussion of Linux distros and trademarks. >> Perhaps I could try to return it there? >> >> If a distro takes a release of Apache X, compiles it with minimal changes >> that adapt it to the environment, and distributes it, I believe that it's a >> fine thing for them to call it simple Apache X, and acknowledge our marks. >> >> If a distro takes a release of Apache X, and make significant changes to >> it, and then distributes it, I believe that it's not OK with us for them to >> simply call it Apache X. I've seen some evidence that Gentoo Linux makes a >> regular habit of this, because their policies drive them to make some >> pretty scary changes in some cases. Others may not share my view. >> >> Further, if someone takes a snapshot (small 's') from source control and >> starts from that, with minimal changes, I think that this would also be >> trademark-acceptable, so long as they accurately describe what they did. >> >> The operative concept here, as Shane has taught it, is 'confusion in the >> marketplace.' If some third party behaves so as to cause confusion as to >> the identity of Apache X, there's a trademark issue. If not, not. >> > > You summed this up to the best of my understanding ... +1. If our legal VP > agrees (and retracts earlier FUD) it appears we are entirely in agreement.
What "FUD"?? Oh... you mean *your* FUD. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
