Rainer Heilke wrote: > Rich Teer wrote: > >> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, John Sonnenschein wrote: >> >> >>> trademark. That was never the problem. The problem is that Sun gave >>> the impression from the inception of the project that the OpenSolaris >>> trademark stood for one thing (ie: O/N et al ) , that it wouldn't be >>> favourably granted to one distro at the expense of others, and that >>> >> Very true. From http://www.opensolaris.org/os/about/ >> >> # The main difference between the OpenSolaris project and the Solaris >> # Operating System is that the OpenSolaris project does not provide an >> # end-user product or complete distribution. Instead it is an open source >> # code base, build tools necessary for developing with the code, and an >> # infrastructure for communicating and sharing related information. >> >> Note the phrase "[T]he OpenSolaris project does not provide an end-user >> product or complete distribution". Seems pretty clear to me. >> >> Project Indiana's usurption of the OpenSolaris name is something I'm >> opposed to, and is in direct contradiction to the preceding statement. >> However, it is, unfortunately, Sun's legal right (as the trademark owner) >> to do so. >> > > I do not disagree with this analysis. I guess where I differ (and maybe > I'm reading too much into Bill's statement) is that I see some > acknowledgment by Sun that they did, in fact, screw up with this. Hence > my original "faltering step" comment. > > I hope that, if I am correct, Sun wants to correct this blunder. Or am I > being too hopeful? <shrug> >
I don't see it as them trying to correct the blunder, since they're not doing any corrective action. They're issuing a statement after the fact recognising that they messaged everything wrongly, and that they're sorry about it - but they're going to continue that course of action regardless. cheers, steve -- stephen lau | stevel at opensolaris.org | www.whacked.net
