On 20 December 2011 22:35, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > On 12/20/2011 4:24 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: >> The proposal says "Existing Flex-related conferences, podcasts and >> websites should be allowed to continue using “Flex” as part of their >> name - Apache Flex will have to create guidelines for that." >> >> Whilst I don't see any problem with that in principle it would be >> really useful to itemise these items so that we know what we are >> dealing with. > > It's a problem as a blanket statement. If the project is not going > to donate its name, it needs to pick a new name on its way into the > incubator, before graduation.
The proposal does say the Flex trademark is being donated. The above is an indication that there are groups already using that mark and they should be allowed to continue to do so. My concern is that there may be a for profit using this trademark that expects to continue to use it. That, I imagine, would be unacceptable. even not-for-profits might present complications. Better to understand what these might be in advance. ... > We love adoption. We don't want entities to misrepresent themselves > as the ASF project itself or that they are endorsed by the ASF. Exactly Ross -- Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
