[OSM-legal-talk] 23rd Dec board meeting

[Rob Myers]

MJ Ray wrote:

> Doesn't being a criminal act mean that the state can investigate (and
> prosecute) without waiting for OSMF's lawyers to act?

Yes. I apologize for mis-emphasizing this. I'd still say it's a
vanishingly small threat, although one that should be made to vanish
through a clear statement or licence.

> [...]
>> But guidelines on trademark use would be good. In particular, the OSM
>> trademark should serve the traditional purpose for trademarks of
>> protecting consumers from inferior knock-offs.
>> e.g - http://www.debian.org/trademark
> 
> Yes and I feel the OpenJDK Trademark Notice would be a more complete
> example.

Best practice examples are very useful.

OpenJDK's notice is here -

http://openjdk.java.net/legal/openjdk-trademark-notice.html

- Rob.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20090127/2b181c3f/attachment.pgp>