Re: [OM Cooker] Odp.: Re: Odp.: Re: Problem updating system

--- On Thu, 6/20/13, Rolf Pedersen <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Rolf Pedersen <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Cooker] [OM Cooker] Odp.: Re: Odp.: Re: Problem updating system
> To: [email protected], [email protected]
> Date: Thursday, June 20, 2013, 7:28 PM
> 
> On 06/20/2013 02:02 PM, David Walser wrote:
> > 
> >> 4.Who renamed (be self decision) distro name to
> Moondrake?
> > Original poll was conducted by Charles Schulz. 
> Top winner was something like mandala or something that
> apparently sounds funny in Russian, and was a result of some
> immature trolling.  Second was probably OpenMandriva,
> which is an irresponsible choice for a *product* name, due
> to trademark issues.  Third was Moondrake.  Seemed
> the best choice given the combination of responsibility and
> community preference at that time.  Furthermore, there
> was nothing set in stone about it that it couldn't be
> changed again before the release.  Finally, setting the
> name to *something* was made more urgent by Charles Schulz
> (again) demanding on behalf of MDV that it no longer be
> called "Mandriva Linux" as it still was at that time.
> Eschewing names with vulgar connotations in any language,
> let alone one used by most of the productive developers
> (afaict) and potential user base, is not trivial.  My
> recollection is that 'OpenMandriva' was licensed/ceded to
> OMA as the only 'mandriva'-containing name that could be
> used without legal challenge.  I voted for that name.
> "Irresponsible" is your characterization and debatable, as
> well.
> The hostility toward Schultz and other support paid for by
> Mandriva SA is, imo, unjustified and a prime source of the
> acrimony that continues to undermine the slow, precarious
> development of this attempted renaissance, the diligent
> unheralded work of volunteers, not only of code developers.
> Rolf

I wasn't expressing any hostility toward Charles, just stating what happened.  And irresponsible may be debatable, but if you think I'm wrong, then you don't understand trademark protection.  It's fine to use it as the association name, as that can be changed easily.  Not so for a product.  It doesn't matter what allowances MDV is making *now* for your ability to use their name.  As long as they own the trademark, they reserve the right to change their mind in the future.  I don't care what promises any current employees may have made about it, when in the future other people have the authority to make decisions about the use of the company's trademarks, they can change their mind.  Period.