Shawn Walker writes: > The interesting thing about all of this is that the OGB and community > has no control over the trademark.
Absolutely true. None of us have any legal control over the mark. Further, the policy for use of the mark is still unresolved and unclear. It's also true that the OGB and the community have an obvious _interest_ in the name. What does the "O" in "OGB" stand for? > So exactly what rules have they > violated? At most, you could accuse them of causing community > dissension or vaguely interpreting the trademark to be included ine > some of the powers of the constitution which it is clearly not. The issue is around laying claim to the name of "the OpenSolaris project" and Indiana being the community's binary distribution, as plainly indicated on www.opensolaris.org. The entire community hasn't granted this project any such status. Now, you can certainly argue that names don't matter, or that you care only about the binaries delivered or the good work the project has done, or even that such a distribution is inevitable. None of that, however, absolves the OGB of responsibility in looking after the community-wide interest, and that's exactly what's going on here. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
