ah. right. sorry Mark i missed something. whilst you *as developers* have been in contact with the Rust Foundation and presumably have private assurances that your use of the Trademarked word "rust" is Authorised under License (through either implication or by actual explicit approval) absolutely nobody else does.
all *new* gcc developers for example who have *not* been party to those private conversations may not safely assume that they are part of any such explicit or implicit consent. and given that literally anyone in the world may pick up the gcc source code and consider themselves to become a developer (as permitted by the GPL) that's a serious concern. in addition to that, even if you as developers have indeed been explicitly or implicitly granted a Trademark License that does *not* extend to *Distributors* of gcc and i again refer you to the wording that i copied here, and to the debian bugreport. i appreciate that this is a bloody nuisance. i do however expect the Rust Foundation to get their act together and act Reasonably and Fairly to sort out the mess they've accidentally created. after all, Trademarks do have value in FOSS Projects, to protect them from harm in ways that Copyright Licenses cannot touch. it's just rather unfortunate that they're really not well-understood, not even by Lawyers! l.