[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fight Trademark with Libremark

From: Aaron Wolf
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fight Trademark with Libremark
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:37:56 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0

I may help where I can…

And I happen to think "LibreMark" is a great term with one problem: I
could see it being used instead to mean "this mark is an official
endorsement or verification that some work is "Libre".

In other words, "LibreMark" could sound not that the use of the mark is
Libre, but that it is a specific *restricted* mark that is used to
indicate that the thing it is marking is Libre…

In general, I think copyright and patent problems are major and
stifling. I think trademark is not always but mostly is okay and not a

On 03/23/2015 10:32 AM, Aurélien DESBRIÈRES wrote:
> Aaron,
> I have the same worry about fragmentation and don't know too if
> something have already start, i have search on libreplanet and does not
> find anything about ...
> So Libremark, is a ping send to people interested to collaborate and
> find a freedom issue on that point.
> I do not "care" of the name, I have just "bypass" as you say the
> propietary system to give us a chance of success in a freedom way.
> We have now a base to start (if nothing have been done before)
> If something have done before in that sort of way, I should be please to
> join this action.
> Cheers
> aurelien
> Aaron Wolf <> writes:
>> Trademark use can already have a good policy such as:
>> I think that if someone made a product called "GNU code-host" and it
>> violated the principles of the GNU project, there would be complaints.
>> Anyway, Gitorious and GitLab and GitHub all went through the process of
>> getting approved to use the trademark. "GIT is a trademark of Software
>> Freedom Conservancy and Gitorious' use of "GIT" is under license." I did
>> not see similar prominantly placed at the other sites, but I know they
>> have permission.
>> I hope and think that you will get permission to continue using the name
>> GitBull anyway.
>> Anyway, I don't object to the concept of LibreMark, I just doubt you
>> learned a lot about the issues and talked to other people. I don't like
>> quick making new definitions like that because 
>> Cheers,
>> Aaron
>> On 03/23/2015 05:20 AM, Aurélien DESBRIÈRES wrote:
>>> Mihamina Rakotomandimby <> writes:
>>>> On 03/22/2015 01:22 PM, Aurélien DESBRIÈRES wrote:
>>>>> Recently I have created  to create a fully free
>>>>> solution in front the trouble of gitorious.
>>>>> Then, the Software Freedom Conservancy contact me because we use*git*
>>>>> in the name.
>>>> Aurélien,
>>>> They contacted you and then what did they ask for?
>>>> Anyway, I'm just curious, just wondering if Gitorious, Gitlab,
>>>> Github,... had "the same problem".
>>>> Regards.
>>> Hi Mihamina,
>>> They contact me and explain me that I do not have the right to use git
>>> in the part of name of gitbull.
>>> As fare as i have understand for gitorious, github, gitlab, they have
>>> created their service before the trademark. (but don't know for new
>>> incommers you can find on search engine ...)
>>> The SFC have been be very correct with me, but that represent a trouble.
>>> I have now to stand for the git committe response ... hope for a license
>>> of use to close the situation.
>>> I have never meet that trouble with GNU (which is also trademark) (which
>>> i have learned both the same time)
>>> Well that is the reason for the need of LibreMark.
>>> To have a form of protection to our freedom, but stay free to use the
>>> things at the time it is not to disturb the job done by thus before.
>>> Regards

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]