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

Reply via email to