Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> Why not just put the mark into the public domain? I think it might
>> already be there.
>
>
> Well that was kind of my point about not being enforceable. The
> PostgreSQL trademark would be almost impossible to enforce as it never
> has been encforced.
>
First IANAL. This is not legal analysis or advice, just my opinion....
Well... There are two questions here. THe first is... "Is the
PostgreSQL trademark enforceable?" and the second is "Should we make the
PostgreSQL trademark enforceable?" I think that the concensus might be
that at the moment it would be difficult to enforce the PostgreSQL
trademark. I don't see concensus on the latter issue however.
> That is the same reason that the Open Source Initiative or whatever
> they call themselves gave up on the (tm) OpenSource.
Open Source(tm) would be a lot harder to enforce than PostgreSQL. I
mean you can file for a trademark and then go attempting to enforce it
but if the term is in common use that is going to be *tough.* This is
the problem for trying to trademark "Open Source." It is hard to show
why "Open Source" as an image should be associated with a specific
entity. PostgreSQL is in a bit of a better spot. There aren't that
many products out there calling themselves "PostgreSQL." There are,
OTOH, a lot of other companies calling themselves "Open Source." This
is the exact reason I chose the name "Metatron" for my company name.
I.e. that any trademarks would be hard to enforce due to the number of
companies using it without a coherent trademark image.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Metatron Technology Consulting
