On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 03:29:47PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Rod Taylor wrote:
[snip]
> > Despite everything SRA has done in the past, if a new CEO came by
> > and said they were forking the project and taking all staff off
> > the public project, we should not allow them to continue use of
> > the PostgreSQL brand. This requires protecting it in the first
> > place. SRA could not have received blanket authorization to use
> > the logo to start with.
> Command Prompt doesn't doesn't have any staff contributing to the
> public project. Do we tell them they can't use the name
> "PostgreSQL"? That is just an example. There are tons of
> PostgreSQL usages out there that have no payback to the community.
> ConnX and dbexperts are good examples.
> > Not only should we take a reasonable cut (in this case) but we
> > should require a certain quality level in the product they put our
> > logo.
> That is my point. Are we going to require a certain level of
> acceptable usage for someone to use the name?
I am not an intellectual property attorney, but...wait a minute. Is
PostgreSQL a trademark? If it is, we need to defend it, or it lapses.
An IP attorney can say how, but I don't think any of the rest of us is
qualified to have an opinion on this without consulting one.
Just my $.02.
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
