This discussion is way out of hand. You guys screaming for publishing the C+D, didn't you see the answer from SimonPoole? They have asked lawyers about advise in publishing it, as well as releasing more information about it. It is not a sign of weak leadership to ask for legal advise in a case that can be as hairy as trademark and copyright issues.
Not that I support trademarking dictionary words, but obviously somebody do, and some patent authorities accept. OSMF need to thread correctly into this matter, and temporarily removing potentially material is one of the steps. As far as I can see, none of SimonPoole's edits are actually redacting the matter in question, his edits are more a "first response", like a "we have recieved your notice and prepare ourself for action. If this case turns toxic maybe SimonPoole will have to redact the edits with the contaminated trademark, let us hope it never comes to that. Let us all also work together in this case to show support to OSM and OSMF and do what can be done to undermine the claims from the issuer of the C+D in such a way that any court cases will tip in favour of OSM continuing what we always have done. I would very much like to see the C+D myself as I find the claims (as far as I have understood from the information already leaked) totally unacceptable, but have put myself with patience, at least until SimonPoole and OSMF have had time to get a formal advise from any legal partner. Aun Johnsen _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
