A trademark and other IP use policy is one of the things the new OSMF board has on its agenda to come up with this year (there are a couple of pieces missing to make this work, but they are being worked on), it is likely to be a joint effort between the CWG, LWG and interested board members.
The case in question (naturally just my personal opinion) is the kind of confusing usage that we would like to avoid. It would be probably ok for a local OSMF chapter, but not for a project that is simply consuming OSM data. We clearly don't want come down heavily activities in the general OSM eco-system, so I would strongly suggest that anybody looking for a name in OSMverse, turn on their brains before they do something stupid. Simon PS: I'm sure both the CWG and the LWG will gladly voice their opinions, if asked, on any proposed "OSM" related names etc. Am 22.02.2013 20:41, schrieb Rob Nickerson: > Hi All, > > Do we have any guidelines for use of the OSM brand? I'm aware that the > OSM-GB "issue" gets raised every now and then but hadn't realised > until today how easy it is to get confused between OSM.org and OSM-GB > - see for example the OSM-GB wiki: > > http://www.osmgb.org.uk/osm-gb-wiki/index.php/Main_Page > > I'm all for third partly initiatives, but would rather see a bit more > separation from OSM's brand. This would reduce confusion to new users > who may seem confused as to why OSM appears to have a second presence > in Great Britain. > > Regards, > Rob > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
