[indiana-discuss] Re: [indiana=discuss] Name of Distro?

[Stephen Lau]

Doug Scott wrote:
> Stephen Lau wrote:
>> Doug Scott wrote:
>>> Shawn Walker wrote:
>>>> On 20/06/07, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 21, 2007, at 02:24, Shawn Walker wrote:
>>>>> > I just think that a project that is supposedly by the community
>>>>> > (Indiana) should have to follow the same rules as the rest of the
>>>>> > community.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with that. But how about if those rules changed? There are a
>>>>> few boundaries imposed by US and other trademark law, but it's
>>>>> plausible that we could ask Sun to change the rules.
>>>>
>>>> That's my main sticking point with it at the moment. If Indiana is a
>>>> community project, it should follow the same rules the rest of the
>>>> community has to follow.
>>>>
>>> Shawn,
>>>   playing by the rules,  Sun own the right by law to call anything 
>>> they want as Solaris or OpenSolaris. No other entity has this right, 
>>> thus they can not use the name. Let just get on with life, and 
>>> produce code!
>>
>> Which means Sun is making a unilateral decision that adversely affects 
>> the community, which makes Sun a poor community member.  Putting on my 
>> Sun employee hat, I don't like that.  Putting on my OpenSolaris core 
>> contributor hat, I don't like that.  And putting on my OGB hat, I like 
>> that even less.
> 
> Steve could you quantify how Sun calling something OpenSolaris would 
> affect the community? The link is poor as most people think outside of 
> the community that OpenSolaris is actually linked to the Sun product 
> called Solaris. Personally I do no think this as a really big issue, and 
> has far too my packets wasted on the issue. Also I really do not care 
> whether Sun enforce or give up their rights. It is up to who is 
> currently in charge of Sun.

Sun calling something OpenSolaris would affect the community in that the 
community has one current definition of OpenSolaris: an open source code 
base; and Sun (or the leaders of Project Indiana, which may or may not 
represent Sun's interest - I don't presume to make a judgement there) 
wishes to change what that definition is.

Whether it's good or bad aside; the action taken affects the community 
and reflects on Sun as a community member.

>> I'm opposed to any action that makes Sun look like a prick who doesn't 
>> care about the community.  It reflects poorly on me, regardless of 
>> what hat I'm wearing.
> 
> Hats aside, While many people call Sun a prick (IBM, HP & Dell 
> included). I find this a little harsh as it is their property. I will 
> not judge 'you' (or Sun) harshly what-ever way Sun make their own 
> decision on what is theirs. Nor should anybody else.

Then you are a better man than most.  :)  But be that as it may, though 
I feel that Sun has the right to make that decision - I don't think they 
should, because even if you won't judge Sun... others will.

>>>> If we can change those rules such that all projects can do the same
>>>> thing, then great!
>>>
>>> It is up to Sun what they want to do with 'their' trademarks. The 
>>> rule is in their favour. Currently I do not see anybody from other 
>>> OpenSolaris  distribution complaining about the issue. Let just move 
>>> on, life is short and talk is too cheap!
>>
>> Sure, Sun can do it - but should they?  Nobody is arguing about 
>> whether or not they can... but whether or not they should.
>>
>> It's within your rights (whether constitutional, human, whatever) to 
>> do many things - but it doesn't mean you should because it reflects on 
>> who you are.  It's no different for Sun at the corporate level.
> 
> In the larger community I think this issue is like a grain of sand. Let 
> Sun make the decision about what is theirs and let just get on with what 
> they have given us so far.

And that's a very pragmatic view that unfortunately not everybody shares.

cheers,
steve

-- 
stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net
opensolaris // solaris kernel development