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

Re: Delegation for trademark negotiatons with the DCCA

On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 01:59:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 03:07:07PM +0200, Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 02:38:38PM +0200, Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > > So a naming in the sense of "Debian Commercial Support Association" 
> > > or something along those lines would seem to make it clearer to me
> > ... or just stick to the original "DCC" as "Debian Commercial Consortium".
> Isn't it entirely plausible to be doing Debian "commercially" without
> wanting to be involved in the DCC? 

Obviously. Very many are already doing that for years and most of them use 
to some degree the trademarked word "Debian" in their name or in their 
published marketing material. But as long as it was clear that this was an 
*external* (commercial or non-commercial) effort, I have not seen many 
complaints about that use of the Trade Marke "Debian". I also don't 
think it is a problem, as long as those external entities behave
decently and do not make express misrepresentation of the trademark.

> Isn't the DCC about standardising on
> some standard set of modified/updated packages for derivatives?
> More than just plausible, surely we expect a bunch of commercial types
> *not* to want to do this?

Yes. In that case, those other commercial people would just have to figure 
yet another commercial/artistic name, going through the same pain in finding
a good name as anybody else. The name space is large enough for anyone. As 
long as it is clear that they are an external (commercial or non-commercial) 
entity, I would expect no problem to implictely or explicitely granting many 
more groups derived rights to the trademark "Debian". Only the wording "core" 
used in combination with the trademark "Debian", implies to me a very specific 
relationship to the project.


Reply to: