Re: Linux trademark and PostgreSQL

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Lance Obermeyer <LObermey(at)pervasive(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Bernier <robert(dot)bernier5(at)sympatico(dot)ca>
Subject: Re: Linux trademark and PostgreSQL
Date: 2005-08-19 20:19:47
Message-ID: 200508192019.j7JKJlw29506@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy


Why not just put the mark into the public domain? I think it might
already be there.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lance Obermeyer wrote:
> Agree that having the Foundation be the administrator makes sense.
>
> I assume the process would be something like this.
> 0. Legal counsel is retained.
> 1. Business terms of licensing the marks is decided. This would cover the approval process, requirements and fees, if any.
> 2. Contract language for sublicensing the trademark to interested parties is drawn up. Something sort of like http://www.linuxmark.org/linux_license_doc.html
> 3. Trademarks are transferred to the Foundation, or a contract is executed giving the Foundation the right to grant perpetual sublicenses. This isn't that hard.
> 4. The program is rolled out. This presumably includes an online form like this http://www.linuxmark.org/license.html.
> 5. People like Pervasive sign up to be licensed users of the mark.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua D. Drake [mailto:jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com]
> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 3:03 PM
> To: Lance Obermeyer
> Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org; Robert Bernier
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Linux trademark and PostgreSQL
>
>
> > Whether the licensor (e.g. the owner of the mark) is a private individual or the "PostgreSQL Foundation" is not relevant from the perspective of the licensee. That is a separate question.
> >
> > Pervasive is interested in becoming a formal licensee of the mark. Just to be clear, we have no desire to be the exclusive licensee.
>
> > We believe that the bar to becoming a licensee of the mark should be low, just as the bar to using the software is. We would
>
> >contribute to the creation of a licensing contract, up to assisting in the creation of a PostgreSQL Mark Institute as the licensing vehicle if that is what makes the most sense.
>
> I believe using the PostgreSQL Foundation for this is the most appropriate.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2005-08-19 20:29:19 Re: Linux trademark and PostgreSQL
Previous Message Lance Obermeyer 2005-08-19 20:15:28 Re: Linux trademark and PostgreSQL