Re: [Spi-trademark] Re: debian domains
- To: <leader@debian.org>, <debian-project@lists.debian.org>
- Subject: Re: [Spi-trademark] Re: debian domains
- From: MJ Ray <mjr@dsl.pipex.com>
- Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 00:15:57 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] E1DUC33-0002rR-00@pipe.localnet>
- In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:44:12 +0100 <20050416114412.GB23835@deprecation.cyrius.com>
- References: <20050401164625.GA12521@excelhustler.com> <OF5256A988.868C9F79-ON85256FE1.0053D3D7-85256FE1.0054D037@cgsh.com> <E1DLRWo-0003n7-00@pipe.localnet> <20050413122932.GK31797@deprecation.cyrius.com> <E1DLhnj-0001G1-00@pipe.localnet> <20050416114412.GB23835@deprecation.cyrius.com>
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> [...] given that the domains currently in question don't seem
> particularly urgent, I suggest we wait until we have a clear procedure
> and policy. [...]
We have at least one of the domains was an "obvious" guess for
debian, yet it was being used by a SuSE reseller until it was
suspended recently. What exactly does qualify as a particularly
urgent domain for enforcement?
--
MJR/slef
http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Reply to: