On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 20:01 -0700, William Stein wrote: > On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Dima Pasechnik <dimp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2012-05-28, Alex Ghitza <aghi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Sun, 27 May 2012 at 10:48AM -0700, William Stein wrote: > >>>> If you think this abuse of sagetrac.org sucks, please consider filing > >>>> a claim by clicking on "File a claim" at the above URL. Hopefully, if > >>>> a few people complain, the site will be taken down. > >> > >> Tracking number 612381 for me. Apart from mentioning two examples of > >> posts lifted from copyrighted material, I tried to make the case that > >> the site is damaging to the reputation of the Sage community, as it > >> wrongly suggests that we engage in (or condone) this type of activity. > >> > >> Interestingly enough, one of the options given in the complaint form > >> is "cybersquatting", which is the term I would most clearly associate > >> with this (they found the door open, moved in, changed the locks, kept > >> some of our furniture but painted the walls a horrible color). > >> Unfortunately, it seems that the legal definition of "cybersquatting" > >> involves offering to sell back the domain to the original owner for a > >> considerable amount, which as far as I know has not happened (yet?). > >> > > Perhaps our BDFL can try unleasing UW lawyers on them... > > UW is interested, but first the trademark on "Sage" has to get sorted > out and officially registered. Hiring a law firm to do this *right* > can take about $5K. However, UW is willing to do this for me for > free, as long as we -- the community of Sage developers -- are OK with > University of Washington owning the trademark on "Sage" in the context > of our software. They tell me that later on they will be willing to > sell the trademark to me in exchange for the cost they had to pay to > register it. > > So... is anybody opposed to University of Washington become the > (temporary) register of the Sage trademark? I'm all for it, since I > am not a lawyer. > > -- William >
If you want to retain "control" of a trademark that others are paying for, have yourself listed as the developer; and a copyright assignee of the trademark. The owner (UW) still retains the right to defend the copyright. UW can still own it. KUDOS to them for stepping up to the plate. Also the sage logo (which I think is nifty) should be trademarked if that has not been done. The same attorneys can do it at the same time. I too am not a lawyer, so these are just things to consider. It is truly sad that folks simply trying to do something that is actually going to be 'free' to the whole world, should have to defend themselves and their efforts to the grubby, greedy, of this world. Take a lesson from the Debian Linux people and 'put your dukes up' LOL. BTW: this stuff is what happens when you begin to become successful. So congrats! frosty -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
