Kyle:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 6:54 PM Kyle Mitchell wrote:
> How will you handle name disputes? How will you deal with
> complaints (to SPDX/LF) about the identifiers being used by
> private parties under their assigned namespaces?
>
> Prior art: https://www.npmjs.com/policies/disputes
Richard:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:32 PM Richard Fontana wrote:
> This sounds appealing to me (if I'm understanding it correctly). From
> Red Hat's perspective one of the great impracticalities of SPDX has
> been that, after many years of SPDX's existence, its adopted
> identifiers still
The word "registry" always gives me flashbacks. Shared
namespaces offer a unique kind of value, but always come
with carrying costs, scaling stepwise with popularity.
For example, the statutory process of copyright-based
takedown requests, the DMCA, doesn't cover trademark-based
claims. There
Richard, Jeff:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:32 PM Richard Fontana wrote:
> Use of "LicenseRef" (not to mention something like
> NOASSERTION) is a nonstarter for the use cases we are most interested
> in. What we've actually done in some cases is use the nonstandard
> identifiers created by nexB.
