[svlug] Response about "Open Source" trademark (fwd)

[Ian Kluft]

I sent this in response to SPI's request for comments from the community.
-- 
Ian Kluft  KO6YQ PP-ASEL                                  Cisco Systems, Inc.
ikluft at cisco.com (work)  ikluft at thunder.sbay.org (home)          San Jose, CA

Forwarded message:
> From: Ian Kluft <ikluft at svlug.svlug.org>
> Subject: Response about "Open Source" trademark
> To: opensource-consult at spi-inc.org
> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 06:23:47 -0800 (PST)
> 
>  This message was mailed and is web-posted at
>  http://www.kluft.com/~ikluft/opensource/tm-response.html
>  
>  This is regarding the following messages from Software in the Public
>  Interest and the Open Source Initiative.
>  
>    "Consultation about the Open Source trademark"
>    http://www.spi-inc.org/news/1998/19981124
>    
>    "OSI Launch Announcement"
>    http://www.opensource.org/osi-launch.html
>    
>  I know people on both sides of this argument from past participation
>  with them on Free Software, Open Source or other projects on the Net.
>  I'll try to present my recommendations in a way that we'll still be
>  friends, even with the ones for whom my recommendations are probably
>  not what they wanted to hear.
>  
>  The term "Open Source" was coined by Eric Raymond. He took the basic
>  definition, based on the Debian Project's criteria, and registered the
>  trademark. Eric has also done the legwork to promote Open Source,
>  travelling at personal expense to visit Netscape when they were first
>  considering the Mozilla source release, and later making himself
>  available for interviews with the media. He has consulted with user
>  groups during his travels, and we've even seen him several times this
>  year here in California, though he lives in Pennsylvania. He's been a
>  trustworthy spokesman for our community.
>  
>  Though all participants in Open Source projects are entitled to an
>  opinion, I encourage everyone to remember that we are volunteers. And
>  so is Eric. I often remind people that "the volunteer who does the
>  work gets to make the decisions." In the absence of a paycheck, that's
>  the way to maintain morale and motivation. I see no reason to make an
>  exception in this case, especially because the volunteer's (Eric's)
>  efforts have been extraordinary.
>  
>  Therefore, I urge SPI to reconsider their decision even for a long
>  discusson period, and return all claims to the Open Source trademark
>  to Eric _without delay_.
>  
>  Yes, I understand there are personality conflicts among some in SPI
>  and some in OSI. (BTW, I am not a member of either group.) I hope
>  there can still be room to put that aside.
>  
>  Yes, I also agree that a membership-based organization would have been
>  a good place to hold the trademark. However that argument is mitigated
>  by the significance of Eric's personal contributions to the Open
>  Source community, and by the fact that SPI did not publicly initiate
>  its membership drive until after this conflict had begun.
>  
>  Finally, and probably most significantly, the strength of the Open
>  Source name has been that there was, until now, only one source with
>  which to find its definition. Errors in the media or in public
>  discussion can be corrected because there is a concrete definition. A
>  conflict over ownership of the Open Source trademark can only weaken
>  our entire movement. This is at a time we know we have opponents
>  looking for weaknesses. (i.e. as in the Halloween Documents.)
>  
>  So, to all the members of the Board of Directors of Software in the
>  Public Interest, please take the public interest in mind and drop this
>  dispute. Your organization continues to have its primary strengths and
>  the loyalty of many volunteers in its Debian, Berlin, GNOME and other
>  projects.

--
echo "unsubscribe svlug" | mail majordomo at svlug.org
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ to unsubscribe
see http://www.svlug.org/mdstuff/lists.shtml for posting guidelines.