[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

Scripsit Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:12:21AM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote:

> I think you trimmed away content that was crucial for understanding the
> parts you did quote, but whatever.  If you need reptition or
> elaboration, I'll provide it.

Please do. I found nothing in your article that seemed to provide
answers to my questions.

> > I ask again: How do you suggest that the NetBSD people should have
> > communicated their misgivings to us?

> One possibility would have been to not raise the trademark issues at all.

Which would amount to saying "We won't tell you why, but please change
your name." I think that would be discouteous in the extreme.

> Possible approaches include:
> 1) don't ask, don't tell
> 2) order us to stop
> 3) grant us a license

4) Ask us nicely to stop.

> 1) is no longer on the table.  They didn't do 3), though they might
> still.  That leaves 2).

And (4). I don't think you have provided *any* evidence that (4) was
not what they did, and I think that to react as if (2) was the case
would be silly and excessively confrontational.

> I'm generally in favor of a "use or lose it" approach to "intellectual
> property", but this is more like "be an asshole or lose it".

I still cannot see how you imagine that they could have *told* us
about their misgivings at all in a way that you wouldn't equal with
"being an asshole".

Henning Makholm                             "In my opinion, this child don't
                                       need to have his head shrunk at all."

Reply to: