On Nov 1, 2007, at 13:35, James Carlson wrote: > For instance, one direct effect is that prior to Indiana, a project > was "in OpenSolaris" if it went through the established community > endorsement process, and no other change was needed. Now that > "OpenSolaris" is a distribution, the Indiana project team gets to pick > and choose among other projects to be granted "OpenSolaris" inclusion, > and needn't take the work product of all of them -- or could even > modify ("hack") some as part of constructing the distribution.
I don't agree with that. Prior to the start of the current trademark discussions, there was only a fair-use right for /anything/ to associate itself with OpenSolaris. That right can't be taken away. It's up to us to work together to make the trademark guideline[1] what we want it to be (while making sure that the people with responsibility in law for the trademark are able to approve it). It's an opportunity to do a new thing collectively and I'm hoping all the stop-energy I've seen today will soon change into do-energy. We have the "running code" (in both the alpha release and the name), it's time to iterate. S. We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and running code. -- David Clark, http://ietf20.isoc.org/videos/ future_ietf_92.pdf, p.19 [1] http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php? title=Trademark_usage_and_Branding_guideline _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org