[Consortium] Re: Linux trademark fees for non-profit organisations

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Daniel James <daniel@...>
Cc: <consortium@...>, Jon maddog Hall <maddog@...>
Date: Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 9:02 pm

Daniel,

We are still tuning the web site and its verbiage. Your points are well taken.

daniel@linuxaudio.org said:

....

> "If you know of entities or persons using the Linux mark without a license

As in most Legal things, every word is important. You missed the word
"negotiate". What is most important to us is that the Mark be sublicensed
properly. If people are not willing to help us do this, both for LMI's interest
and for their own, then maybe they should not be using the Mark. On the other
hand, we DO listen.

> That would be a good idea. Have you asked Bruce Perens? It was his concern

We are currently working with Bruce to meet his concerns. We do not anticipate
any changes to the license itself. We believe that Bruce misinterpreted the
license. We would have preferred Bruce coming to us with questions and issues
before going to the Debian community. If he had, we probably would have been
able to get much further than we are right now, but that is water over the dam.

We plan on creating a FAQ that explains some of the harder points of law in
more understandable terms. The tricky part of that is not to compromise what
is needed by the legalese to protect the Mark by having an interpretation in
English that does not accurately reflect the legalese.

> However, the actual licence text, by setting an annual fee for non-profits,

The term "fair use" is a very legal term, and has very specific needs. I can
not just say that your use of the term "Linux" is "fair use" just because it
fits the definition of what you and I might consider "fair".

>As far as linuxaudio.org is concerned, we could help that effort by

This would be a wonderful thing, and would help to protect the Mark in any
case.

All I can do is say that LMI is doing its best to protect the Mark, and none of
the members of LMI or OSDL wants to make the use of the Mark any harder than
we absolutely must.

Of all the things I do, this is the least enjoyable, but I am well aware of the
dynamics of the FOSS community, and LMI is working to both protect the Mark
and make it available, something extremely tricky under Trademark law.

Having said all this, I beg to be quiet about this at this point so I can
prepare for a board meeting where I will discuss your concerns and feedback
with the attornies and other board members.

md
--
Jon "maddog" Hall
Executive Director Linux International(R)
email: maddog@li.org 80 Amherst St.
Voice: +1.603.672.4557 Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A.
WWW: http://www.li.org

Board Member: Uniforum Association, USENIX Association

(R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries.
(R)Linux International is a registered trademark in the USA used pursuant
to a license from Linux Mark Institute, authorized licensor of Linus
Torvalds, owner of the Linux trademark on a worldwide basis
(R)UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the USA and other
countries.

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[Consortium] Next item..., Patrick Shirkey, (Mon Jan 26, 9:11 pm)
Re: [Consortium] Status of FireWire/MLan support?, Andreas Kuckartz, (Wed Apr 20, 8:14 pm)
[Consortium] RE: New LAD site is up and needs work, Ivica Ico Bukvic, (Thu Mar 30, 5:34 am)
[Consortium] Small version of logo for linkage, Daniel James, (Thu Aug 31, 4:54 pm)
[Consortium] FreeBoB 1.0.11 released (package fix), Pieter Palmers, (Fri Apr 11, 3:03 pm)
[Consortium] Best wishes for the Holidays, Ivica Ico Bukvic, (Thu Dec 24, 5:53 pm)
[Consortium] Re: Linux trademark fees for non-profit organis..., Jon maddog Hall, (Thu Jun 30, 9:02 pm)
Re: [Consortium] Next item..., Dave Phillips, (Mon Jan 26, 10:48 pm)
Re: [Consortium] Next item..., iriXx, (Mon Jan 26, 9:34 pm)
Re: [Consortium] Next item..., Jan Depner, (Mon Jan 26, 10:10 pm)
Re: [Consortium] Next item..., iriXx, (Mon Jan 26, 10:20 pm)
Re: [Consortium] Next item..., Steve Harris, (Mon Jan 26, 9:34 pm)