On Feb 16, 2008 4:35 PM, Alan DuBoff <alan.duboff at sun.com> wrote: > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Bill Rushmore wrote: > > > Alan DuBoff wrote: > >> What is your or other folks' idea on using OpenUNIX as a name? > >> > >> > > > > I do think the idea of changing the name should a be very seriously > > considered. This puts ownership of the name with the community and doesn't > > conflict with Sun's copyrights. This also ends the confusion over a > > distribution vs a community which was a problem even before the latest > > controversy. The unfortunate thing is that since OpenSolaris has "Solaris" > > in the name everyone assumes it's an OS or should be one. This is why the > > confrontation with Indiana was just about inevitable. My only concern is > > that would it be too late to change the name at this point? Maybe but maybe > > not. > > This is unfortunate that it all unfolded the way it did...but no use in > crying over spilled milk...better to clean it up. > > > Unfortunately OpenUNIX has already been taken by Caldera which is now owned > > by SCO. But if we decide that name change should be done we can come up > > with > > something better. :-) > > I want to know for certain. Even if it is, I would like Sun to cough over > what it costs to get a name that is fitting to our community, or we come > up with something that isn't in conflict with another. > > OpenUNIX is my preference, even if the Open Group needs to be involved, > and I feel Sun should handle that relationship/cost for the community.
The primary issue with using UNIX in the name is that whole issue of a trademark within a trademark. Ugly. Not only that, who the heck is going to foot the bill for it? There are far better things to spend money on IMO. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben
