Re: [Phpgroupware-developers] Project Structure - some progress

[David Kelly]

On Thu, 15 May 2003 06:17, Jason Wies wrote:
> First of all, I am glad to see the progress that has been made in less than
> two days time.  I think everyone has shown that they want what is best for
> the project.

I completely agree.  It is good and very encouraging to see that all parties 
are willing to negiotate and work this through.

> On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 11:32:06PM -0700, Dan Kuykendall wrote:
> > Dave Hall wrote:
> > >Oustanding Issues - Not agreed
> > >Trademark - i am taking a back seat position on this one for the time
> > > being
> >
> > Im not really going to back down from this, so if possible lets move on.
> > A good example of why it may be useful for me to keep the trademark is
> > that if a company wanted to hijack the project by putting staff into the
> > project and basicly taking control by the system we are putting in
> > place. I would be able to keep the project from being taken over by way
> > of trademark ownership.
>
> I don't think that scenario is feasible.  If the trademark were assigned to
> the FSF, then no one could take control of it.  If the trademark were
> assigned to the project itself, then a malicious company would have to a)
> wait up to 12 months for the elections to come around and b) get elected to
> four positions needed for a majority vote.  This situation is easily
> avoided by adding a rule that "no more than three representatives from the
> same company can sit on the CT at the same time".
>
> > I will not use the trademark to simply get my way, or any such malicious
> > actions. The ONLY time I will use it is if the project becomes something
> > I could not be proud of and want to be involved with. In this case I
> > would use the trademark and leverage to fork the project to allow phpGW
> > to continue down a better path.
>
> I have to say this sounds like veto by another name.  In a community
> project, everyone has the ability to fork, but no one has the ability to
> kick everyone else out.  That is what makes the debates so productive;
> everyone realizes that they have to agree to a single solution.  I trust
> Dan not to constantly threaten to kick everyone out, but I also know that
> anyone who is at odds with Dan in a technical debate would be restrained in
> what they say because they know Dan can pull the plug at any time.  I think
> if the project is going to be as productive as possible, everyone needs to
> feel completely free to express their ideas to everyone else and know that
> at the end of the day it is the will of the community that will decide. 
> And unfortunately I think that means giving the community control over
> trademark issues as well.

I completely agree with Zone here ... my point goes back to 'branding' again 
.... essentially by retaining control of the trademark Dan you still have 
complete power over the 'brand' that is been built everyday by the community.  
At any point in time if you disagree with what is happening (even if a clear 
majority agree with it) then you can still stand up and say 'Do it my way 
otherwise I will pull the plug'.  From what I can see you saying is that -  
'yes I will let people administer this project in some formal structure 
without me ... but I still want to be able to wrestle back control of the 
project at any time should I need to.'

>From my understanding of domain names even if you assign the administritive 
contact to be FSF ... you can still remove them at any time.  And if it went 
to court you could easily win as you own the trademark and are the original 
owner of the domain.

So once again I come back to my point - that having one person controlling the 
'brand' of the project exposes other individuals and companies to a lot of 
risk in that if that one controlling individual ever should happen to go a 
bit crazy the 'brand' could quite effectively be destroyed or severly 
damaged. (whos to say that that this might never happen -people's nature can 
change over time due to circumstance etc).  This is a substantial risk for 
companies and individuals who would like to invest serious amounts of time 
and money into the project and so less parties will be interested imho.

Kind regards
--------
David Kelly
CEO / Account Manager
Zeald Ltd

E-Centre
PO Box 102-904
North Shore Mail Centre
Auckland
New Zealand

Ph:  +64 9 415 7575
Fax:  +64 9 443 9794
Mbl:  (NZ) 021 434 105
Web:  http://www.zeald.com