Re: "Debian" Core Consortium
"Benj. Mako Hill" <email@example.com> wrote:
> M.J., since the trademark committee was created, you are the *only*
> Debian developer who has actively argued for giving up the mark and
> making Debian a generic. I'm sure other people would support it but I
> just don't see support for the complete alternative that you have
> advocated in the past.
Please send personal email to me directly, not via lists. I
don't recall ever advocating making Debian a generic (although
since learning some details, it doesn't seem all bad), but I
don't believe the tightly-controlled trademark is worthwhile.
Some other DD argued for a more liberal licence during the
"Trusted Debian" and "Debian Hardened" discussions. There is
a desirable position more liberal than the current almost-no-
-commercial-use do you agree?
> > I am disappointed that a "general trademark policy" based on the
> > DFSG is not being studied, but any clearer terms would be welcome.
> The stated goal of the trademark committee was to come up a policy
> that was as permissive as possible (in the DFSG sense) while still
> operating within what is required by trademark law.
I thought the stated goal was to elaborate the existing policy
or develop a new "open use" trademark policy. If the open use
policy is not possible, doesn't that leave only elaborate?
> Unlike copyright,
> failing to enforce or taking a completely permissive attitude toward a
> trademark will actually lead you to lose it.
We have many users of the debian name running around,
some told to the project. The previous DPL stated the present
trademark policy is "never enforced properly" and also kept
a list of known violations. Have we lost it yet or how much
longer before we lose it?
1 - http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/01/msg00263.html
> That may be fine with
> some in the project but my sense from reading this thread and others
> is that most people in the project like having Debian refer to stuff
> made by the Debian project and not to anything by anybody.
Is that incompatible with a trademark licence following DFSG?
(It's not current practice, anyway.)
> > When and where will spi-trademark report next?
> There are periodic reports on trademark related issues to spi-private,
> spi-general and (more frequently) spi-board.
Cool. What's the period? I've looked back over 2005 for
private and general and didn't spot one. When and where will
spi-trademark report next?
> > Can you forecast when it will present a policy to spi-board?
> Help is certainly desired. If you help, it will be sooner. :)
Help how? By joining the email list? Please ask
spi-trademark-owner, then. I think there may be a problem with
mailman, as I received two confirmation request emails to my
most recent subscribe request.
MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/