On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 03:17:31AM -0500, Nick Mathewson wrote: > I'd love to see ways we can be more permissive without abandoning the > trademark entirely. I'd been under the impression that we were doing > pretty good. We seem to be at least as open as with our trademark as > Debian, for example. Where specifically is our current policy shitty? > After reading it... what specifically should it allow IYO that it > doesn't?
Heya, speaking as Debian lead here, I just want to point out that we've recently (as in: ~1 month ago) improved our trademark policy. Version 2.0 is available at http://www.debian.org/trademark#policy , in case you want to check it out. As it often happens with the legal matters we deal with, we've worked under legal advice from SFLC, and we always try to share the information we get with other free software projects. So feel free to build upon it. But needless to say: legal advise is not transferable so, unfortunately, you're on your own when reusing. For what is worth, our "specification" for the policy has been something like "be as liberal with our trademarks as law permits, without undermining our trademark rights". The reason is precisely the one given by Nick: avoid giving up on the possibility of fighting abuses, such as people claiming to distribute Debian, and distributing malware instead. HTH, -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk