The names should be protected at this stage. It's not clear whether they're doing something wrong or not
Or more importantly, its not clear if they are doing it knowingly, or just doesn't know they not in compliance with the license. If its the latter, a quick telling them that they might want to correct that one little mistake is better strategy than yelling out "OMFG, you violated the holy GPL, you burn in hell forever, kthxbye!"
However, if the dont care to answer what you point out or more specifically if they violates knowingly and doesnt give a rats ass about it, its up one level on the no more mister nice guy-scale.
Well, trademarks are registered in specific classes. There are 45 classes and every regristration for each class needs a specific description and comes with a fee. That plus given the fact that trademarks not used "degenerates" its mostly not worth to hog everything everywhere.
My guess is that theese two "Woothworths" are not only in different parts of the world but registered in different classes.
'Open Source' (which seems to be hijacked by the OSI as a trademark?)
I think you're referring to this picture: http://www.masternewmedia.org/images/opensource_logo.gif
As you se if you look close at it, its the image that is trademarked, not the term (yes, I agree that its at best a little confusing). I belive they tried to trademark the term but was turned down because it was to broad to trademark such a thing.
Slashdot Mirror
The organization's existence was never an end in itself. Those who were involved have moved on to other similar projects.
Organization exist for a purpose, when/if that purpose dont exist anymore its time to wrap up, close down and move on to new adventures.
Show some fucking respect.
Have some sense of humor.
exactly, wasnt just that what the "java trap" was all about?
The names should be protected at this stage. It's not clear whether they're doing something wrong or not
Or more importantly, its not clear if they are doing it knowingly, or just doesn't know they not in compliance with the license. If its the latter, a quick telling them that they might want to correct that one little mistake is better strategy than yelling out "OMFG, you violated the holy GPL, you burn in hell forever, kthxbye!"
However, if the dont care to answer what you point out or more specifically if they violates knowingly and doesnt give a rats ass about it, its up one level on the no more mister nice guy-scale.
So this is what "This APT has Super Cow Powers" was about all along!
Eben Moglen explained the software patent FUD best: the be very afraid tour.
Do we then start sending troops into nation X for downloading Disney movies?
I can just picture it before me! ;-D
Well, trademarks are registered in specific classes. There are 45 classes and every regristration for each class needs a specific description and comes with a fee. That plus given the fact that trademarks not used "degenerates" its mostly not worth to hog everything everywhere.
My guess is that theese two "Woothworths" are not only in different parts of the world but registered in different classes.
I am expecting Go to stay and prosper.
So, what you're saying is that you dont think it will Go away? ;)
Not if you want to write commercial software on top of it...
s/commercial/proprietary (or non-free)
The GPL is a commercial license. It clearly permits the licensed software to be sold.
It could also be that you're just talking to a fucking mormon.
There, fixed it for ya.
there's ads in my RSS feed from Slashdot. I ignore them.
Ignore them?? You can do that?!?!!
...but who tagged this "itsatarp"?
Did you mean "itsatrap"
1) Make a Crybaby story about how many people pirate your DRM-free game
2)Make sure story hits /.
3) ???
4) PROFIT!
Google Exec: We're going to open.... The box!
People: Open what?
Google Exec: The box! With... the wires, and blinky lights, and stuff in it!
People: What's in the box?
Nothing, you're so Stooopid! http://se.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx_UJxuQGXo
Wow, I wonder what year will be "Year of Plan9 on the laptop"
'Open Source' (which seems to be hijacked by the OSI as a trademark?)
I think you're referring to this picture: http://www.masternewmedia.org/images/opensource_logo.gif As you se if you look close at it, its the image that is trademarked, not the term (yes, I agree that its at best a little confusing). I belive they tried to trademark the term but was turned down because it was to broad to trademark such a thing.
Sound like... Developers, developers, developers, developers....
What part of FOSS was it you didnt understand?
you forgot one thing, they are in fact "stupid and ugly".
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers.
Dinosaurs died because they where drowning in amber!
No, dinosaurs died because they were drowning in amber.