On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 06:22:31PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > I'm tired of this argument. You can interpret that as capitulation if
> > that's important to you. We appear to have divergent premises. You
> > regard trademark saber-rattling
Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm tired of this argument. You can interpret that as capitulation if
> that's important to you. We appear to have divergent premises. You
> regard trademark saber-rattling as potentially a friendly act.
That is a deliberately falsified and misle
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 10:29:24PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[snip]
I'm tired of this argument. You can interpret that as capitulation if
that's important to you. We appear to have divergent premises. You
regard trademark saber-rattling as po
Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 09:02:35PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > They added that such confusion might make it hard for them to defend
> > their trademark.
> Have you seen the precise language?
No. Have you?
> > Is that a threat of litigation a
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I have little patience for superstitious beliefs, and less still for
people who claim to be defending the tender feelings of the ignorant.
Brian T. Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> then writes:
But why use names correlated with evil when other options
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 09:02:35PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 04:31:42AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
> > > Which would amount to saying "We won't tell you why, but please change
> > > your name." I think that would
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:47:01PM -0500, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:13:29AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Cf. Jesux.
> >
> > ...which has gone for some years without attracting anyone who is both
> > pious enough and clueful en
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:55:20PM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > You seem to have already noted this, but I should re-emphasize that
> > since the Tolkien novels are still under copyright, then legally the
> > names from them are just as much risk
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 03:26:13PM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Still the nice thing about using old, old names like the ones I proposed
> > is that you can be almost positive no one has a leg to stand on in any
> > claim to "own" the name.
>
>
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:36:35AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
>
> [We're back off-topic for -legal.]
>
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 07:33:17PM -0500, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
Alle 21:13, mercoledì 17 dicembre 2003, Nathan Hawkins ha scritto:
> If you wanted Greek names, there are plenty of obscure nymphs, satyrs,
> centaurs, etc. to choose from.
Here's the name index from Ovid's Metamo
Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 04:31:42AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Which would amount to saying "We won't tell you why, but please change
> > your name." I think that would be discouteous in the extreme.
> No, they simply could have said that they
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 04:31:42AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:12:21AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
> > I think you trimmed away content that was crucial for understanding the
> > parts you did quote, but whatever.
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:13:29AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Cf. Jesux.
>
> ...which has gone for some years without attracting anyone who is both
> pious enough and clueful enough to develop it.
>
> I find this inverse correlation suggestive. :)
Or, it could be that Jesux wasn't reall
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Branden Robinson) wrote on 17.12.03 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It's impossible to not offend fundamentalists.
And let's not forget there are different kinds of fundamentalists. Who
agree on very little indeed.
> I honestly don't think it's worth the time to try and placate t
> "Branden" == Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Branden> Remember, outside the Free Software community, copyright is
Branden> used only as a destructive weapon, not a tool for promoting
Branden> cooperation and harmony.
It looks like not only outside Free Software community, con
Nathan Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If Homer isn't copyright and trademark free, nothing is safe.
Homer is not trademark-free. Try googling for "Odyssey is a registered
trademark".
[What is this doing here? Moving to -curiosa]
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:06:01PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> >Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> >the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> >at rand
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 01:54:14PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 03:13:03PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> >
> > If we're really worried about this, we can always use the names of the
> > Dwarves in the Hobbit. Most (all?) of those names are from Icelandic
> > sags, IIRC. So i
Nathan Hawkins wrote:
>Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
>the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
>at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
>that would be helpful to Debian. That kind of publicity we
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:09:37AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:54:15AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:00:21PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > > Even so, I'm amenable to anyone who can come up with names w
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Joel Baker wrote:
> Besides, using Tolkien names is a long geek tradition.
>
And that's what's wrong with it. The association of geeks and Tolkien is
such a cliche[1] Same goes for Pratchett (not to mention he is rather
overrated in my opinion.)
No if you're going to go w
Nathan Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you wanted Greek names, there are plenty of obscure nymphs, satyrs,
> centaurs, etc. to choose from. Since the Greeks classified them as
> neither evil spirits nor deities, many of them would qualify as daemons
> in the classical sense.
We could als
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 03:13:03PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
>
> If we're really worried about this, we can always use the names of the
> Dwarves in the Hobbit. Most (all?) of those names are from Icelandic
> sags, IIRC. So is Gandalf.
All of them. I suppose they even have enough of the right
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> You seem to have already noted this, but I should re-emphasize that
> since the Tolkien novels are still under copyright, then legally the
> names from them are just as much risky choices as names from Pratchett
> are.
Does anyone seriously think that copyr
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Nor do I. I mean, consider the fact that my personal email is
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], and I use it quite extensively (just check the
> list archives) - this is not exactly something used by someone big on
> placating fundies.
Presumably "fundies" will know, or will
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Still the nice thing about using old, old names like the ones I proposed
> is that you can be almost positive no one has a leg to stand on in any
> claim to "own" the name.
An old name can still be a current trademark. Hermes is an old name
and a trademark
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:12:21AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I think you didn't bother to read any of the parts of my message that
> > you didn't quote.
>
> I did. But I trimmed away those that were not necessary for the reader
> to be remind
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 11:10:24AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 08:15:04AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Actually, given that I'm a long-time and deep-seated Tolkien geek, I rather
> > like the notion of using the Valar - they're
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 08:15:04AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> Actually, given that I'm a long-time and deep-seated Tolkien geek, I rather
> like the notion of using the Valar - they're fictional, and Tolkien's work
> isn't yet out from under copyright, but they
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:54:15AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
>
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:00:21PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Even so, I'm amenable to anyone who can come up with names which are less
> > loaded to random fundamentalists, if possible;
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 11:01:49AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> Branden's second proposal of using something from Pratchett did have a
> nice ring to it, [...]
That wasn't my proposal; it was made by Roland Mas in Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
--
G. Br
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:37:44PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:53:15PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I doubt you'd have known they were names from Christian demonology if I
> > hadn't told you. I didn't propse that we use bet
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Catholics compared to their Protestant brethren. I should think if
> anyone were taught demonology these days, it would be kids in Catholic
I knew all about demons around that age, and I'm not even a religious
person.
Doom taught me everything I ne
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:00:21PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> Even so, I'm amenable to anyone who can come up with names which are less
> loaded to random fundamentalists, if possible; of course, most of the
> sources on daemons say that they are, as a rule, wi
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:41:50AM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> I consider myself educated, and I've never heard of any demons in school
> where we had 13 years of religious (catholic) education. I can
> definitely say that I'm not offended, and I doubt that
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
[We're back off-topic for -legal.]
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 07:33:17PM -0500, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I have little patience for superstitious beliefs, and less still for
> > people who claim to be defending
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:00:56PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:11:20AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Unfortunately, my experience with the topic tends to indicate that the
> > same folks who care are very likely to consider there mer
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 02:49:39PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 07:03:25PM -0500, Branden Robinson <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> > [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:21:30PM +0100, Rol
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 15:15, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wnp
> > Several categories of material are generally not eligible for
> > federal copyright protection. These include among others:
> >
> >
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 10:40:11PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
> Would "Debian Aulë" be appropriate?
>
> "Of the fabric of Earth had Aulë thought, to whom Ilúvatar had given
> skill and knowledge scare less than to Melkor; but the delight and
> pride of Aulë is in the deed of making, and in the t
Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wnp
> Several categories of material are generally not eligible for
> federal copyright protection. These include among others:
>
> Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans; familiar symbo
On Dec 15, 2003, at 17:40, Roger Leigh wrote:
However, there may well be copyright issues. "Slink", "Woody",
"Potato" and "Bo" etc. aren't exactly unique, but you would be hard
pushed to find another book with "Manwë", "Oromë", etc. in it.
You can't copyright a name. See:
http://www.copyrig
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 11:01:49AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
>> Branden's second proposal of using something from Pratchett did have a
>> nice ring to it, and then there's always the valar.
>
> Actually, given that I'm a long-time and deep-seated Tolkie
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 10:40:11PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 11:01:49AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> >> Branden's second proposal of using something from Pratchett did have a
> >> nice ring to it, and then there's always the
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 12:19:10PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 08:15:04AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Actually, given that I'm a long-time and deep-seated Tolkien geek, I rather
> > like the notion of using the Valar - they're fictional, and Tolkien's work
> > isn't yet out
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 07:03:25PM -0500, Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
>
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:21:30PM +0100, Roland Mas wrote:
> > I'll suggest Offler (or Om), Foorgol (I don't like Fate) and, um,
> > some other god coming
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 03:09:07PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 12:19:10PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> >
> > Having cheated and grabbed an online resource for it from Google, the
> > following possibilities show up (my apologies for the lack of accents;
> > I can't easily
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 08:15:04AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 11:01:49AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
>
> > Of course, I don't really think we should merit religious nonsense with
> > the honour of giving name to the products of Debian labour anyway...
> > And if we do, le
As an aside, the questions that were sent to Mr. Mewburn have been
forwarded to the rest of TNF's Board, and scheduled for discussion on their
next conference call (in a couple of days). His personal reaction to the
thought of renaming the ports to 'codenames' was quite positive; in his
(personal)
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:47:28PM -0500, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
>
> > Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> > the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> > at random.) Using names of e
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:11:20AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> Unfortunately, my experience with the topic tends to indicate that the
> same folks who care are very likely to consider there mere *concept* of
> a 'daemon' to be anathema, evil, foul, unclean, and all sorts of other
> descriptives.
Cf
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:53:15PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Debian FreeBSD -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > > Debian NetBSD -> Debian Nab
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:43, "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> > Street names from Berkeley have appeal, and few fundies assign
> > Manichean properties to asphalt.
>
> Given Berkeleys' other famous export is LSD, how about:
>
> acid,
> suns
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> Street names from Berkeley have appeal, and few fundies assign
> Manichean properties to asphalt.
>
Given Berkeleys' other famous export is LSD, how about:
acid,
sunshine,
sugar
etc.?
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
La Salle Debain - htt
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
> that would be helpful to Debian.
Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 10:30:04PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > I think you're seing spectres.
> I think you didn't bother to read any of the parts of my message that
> you didn't quote.
I did. But I trimmed away those that were not necessary
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:41:50AM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Branden Robinson in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Debian FreeBSD -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > > > Debian NetBSD -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> > > > Debian OpenBSD -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
> > > [...]
> > > You
Re: Branden Robinson in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Debian FreeBSD -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > > Debian NetBSD -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> > > Debian OpenBSD -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
> > [...]
> > Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> > th
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have little patience for superstitious beliefs, and less still for
> people who claim to be defending the tender feelings of the ignorant.
But why use names correlated with evil when other options are
available which interfere less with Debian's go
On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 10:30:04PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
[snip]
> I think you're seing spectres.
I think you didn't bother to read any of the parts of my message that
you didn't quote.
--
G. Branden Robinson|I'm sorry if the following sounds
Debian GNU/Linux
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:21:30PM +0100, Roland Mas wrote:
> > Feel free to propose alternatives from, say, the origional mythology which
> > spawned the concept of daemons as beings which were not inherently good or
> > evil, then.
>
> I'll suggest Offler
[I am not subscribed to -bsd.]
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Debian FreeBSD -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > Debian NetBSD -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> > Debian OpenBSD ->
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:21:30PM +0100, Roland Mas wrote:
>
> I'll suggest Offler (or Om), Foorgol (I don't like Fate) and, um,
> some other god coming out of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels,
> preferably whose name starts with an N.
>
> Or something like that.
One should never name the
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > > Well, no offense, but that's ugly as hell, and is going to square the
> > > > amount of confusion people experience when trying to decode our OS
> > > > names.
On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Well, no offense, but that's ugly as hell, and is going to square the
> > > amount of confusion people experience when trying to decode our OS
> > > names.
> >
> > Agreed, unfortunately - it is, and I suspect it may well. Sugg
[ If you're being impatient about resolving this, please see the bottom ]
[ of the email for an imporant bit of information... ]
[ snip ]
On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 10:29:05AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
>
>
Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 09:28:12AM +0430, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > Legally speaking, you're right. Now, on more practical grounds, I do
> > not think that the NetBSD Foundation threatened to sue us.
> I didn't say they did. They did identify
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 09:28:12AM +0430, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 11:54:09AM -0500,
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> a message of 126 lines which said:
>
> > Debian either needs a trademark license from the NetBSD
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 10:29:05AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> [ Adding -legal to the Cc; it may become inappropriate for -devel, at ]
> [ some point, in which case folks should remove the -devel Cc. The -bsd ]
> [ Cc should probably remain no matter what,
[ Adding -legal to the Cc; it may become inappropriate for -devel, at ]
[ some point, in which case folks should remove the -devel Cc. The -bsd ]
[ Cc should probably remain no matter what, as this could potentially ]
[ affect any of the BSD ports.
71 matches
Mail list logo
