Re: OpenJDK draft trademark license
> Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:15:17 +0200
> From: Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it>
> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 09:06:42 -0700 Mark Reinhold wrote:
>> If you're content with security fixes being discussed in the FAQ then
>> I'd like to leave the text of the notice as-is.
>
> I would personally prefer seeing this kind of issues clarified in the
> trademark license text, rather than in a FAQ...
The tradeoff here is that if the trademark notice mentions one category
of change that's already intended to be allowed under the "vast majority"
test then people will naturally ask for others to be listed, or why some
are not listed, and so forth.
We've generally found that leaving interpretive questions such as this to
a related FAQ makes for licenses that are clearer and simpler in the long
run. That was, e.g., our experience with the Distribution License for
Java (DLJ) [1,2].
- Mark
[1] http://download.java.net/dlj/DLJ-v1.1.txt
[2] http://download.java.net/dlj/DLJ-FAQ.txt
Reply to: