Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)
>>>>> "Joel" == Joel Baker <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Joel> On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 10:33:30AM +0200, Momchil Velikov wrote:
>> How can the use of ``NetBSD'' "dilute" the trademark, when it refers
>> to a piece of the same software ?
Joel> Basically, saying "Debian GNU/NetBSD" could be read as implying
Joel> "We're using NetBSD" rather than "We're using parts of NetBSD",
Joel> and if read as the former, is not a true and factual statement,
Joel> thus (possibly) causing issues with dilution of trademark, by
Joel> using the name to refer to something other than it's intended
Eh? The ``Debian GNU/'' part is exactly what distinguishes it from
``NetBSD'' -- the system taken as a whole. For me it is naturaly to
think that ``NetBSD'' means NetBSD and ``Debian GNU/NetBSD'' means
some derivative. Isn't that clear ? What would one think had been the
reasons to add additionall qualifiers to the plain ``NetBSD'' if not
for because it is NOT NetBSD ?
Does The NetBSD Foundation actually claim dilution of the trademark
? Is there any evidence of that ? Like the amount of losses they have
suffered because of someone took the Debian GNU/NetBSD operating
system for the NetBSD operating system ?
Joel> Whereas saying "We use <X>, <Y>, and <Z> from NetBSD" is true
Joel> and factual, and uses 'NetBSD' solely in a context of referring
Joel> to the body of software produced by the NetBSD project's efforts
Joel> - which is what the trademark is intended to refer to, and thus,
Joel> is not a dilution of it.
I do not question the use of ``NetBSD'' to refer to the the body of
software produced by the NetBSD project (FWIW, a huge amount of code
in what NetBSD refers to is NOT produced by NetBSD project). The fact
is that we do not use ``NetBSD'', we use ``Debian GNU/NetBSD'', which
merely contains the substring ``NetBSD''.
I'd really like to see a more friendly attitude from TNF. And by
"friendly attitude" I'd rather understand not making an attack based
on unsubstantiated claims in the first place, than bending over.