Andrew Bernard: > Lilypond is not a brand and not a trademark. So, no one has put in for a trademark for Lilypond?
> It's open source software, and > it does not compete in a market. Dear me. Lilypond software has no right or > monopoly over the English word lily. Software can be free/libre (open source) and still have trademark. Obtaining a trademark for free software is not a bad idea. It protects users from potential confusion (imagine if anyone could copy any branding they wished--how would you know you were using a brand you trust?). Proprietary software is unethical because it restricts its users. However because trademark protects users and not proprietors I would not consider it unethical. GNOME, for example, takes actions to protect its trademarked logo and name. Here are some examples: unitarypatent.com/gnome-trademark-infringement/ https://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/1331233/gnome-project-seeks-donations-for-trademark-battle-with-groupon Other info from there website: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Resources/LicensingAgreement https://www.gnome.org/logo-and-trademarks/ ...having trouble finding a published reason for the rationale, but what I have read was convincing. Well, I guess there is a "good, bad, and ugly" according to https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/apr/29/trademarks-good-bad-ugly At any rate, just watch out, if Apple continually tries to advance into imitating free/libre branding in an attempt to push it out of the market completely, then that would be a problem for all of us. Devin _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
