> It's sad, that a project encouraging free speech has a restrictive > trademark policy.
I must admit to laughing a bit at that (given TPB and the internet as a whole are still proving classes of IP rights rather silly) and the enforcement possibilities against any purely darknet examples, no matter how blatant, are zero. On the other hand, I'm sure TPO is doing it almost entirely in an attempt to protect the haphazard human rights groups or whatever against evil wares. As opposed to doing it so TPO can just squat on their own name for grins. And that TPO lawyers serve at the direction of a reasonably well clued and rational board. As to 'safety', note that Tor says Tor itself is 'potentially unsafe software, beta, etc'. Which is lent out, among other things bad and good, with the name. There could maybe be some verbage update to the TM FAQ about 'sure, so long as you're not evil, you can use tor in your name and leech our graphics'. But then there's defining evil vs. just crappy shareware/projects. I had a project that used tor in the name, but renamed it because i found that name actually limited the scope of the project. Tor is not just 'Tor' but torbirdy, torsocks, exonerator, etc which kindof implies an internal debate about squatting to keep names open for TPO, or just for TPO. Or seeding off or bringing in confusingly named projects themselves. I figure consumers will sort it all out as always... you mean lexus the car? no, lexis the datamine.' Meh. _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
