[OSM-talk] Draft Trademark Policy

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Sat Aug 5 12:12:42 UTC 2017

Am 05.08.2017 um 12:04 schrieb Yves:
> " How you formulate a policy that permits osmosis and osmium but not
> OsmAnd,
> though, I have no idea"
> How you formulate a policy that deals with the name of established
> projects, I have no idea. But should you? Maybe a far softer
> grandfathering rule would be easier.
> Yves
Just so that there is no misunderstanding: we have not formulated a
specific grandfathering regime wrt software products with "osm" in their
name, or if it is even necessary and can't be just as well be looked at
on a case by case base.

Basically, simply adding clear notices as suggested in section 2 would
already go a long way in making things clear.

I slightly disagree with Richard (not on that the misdirected OsmAnd
support request are annoying :-)), but OsmAnd is a community and a
commercial undertaking at the same time, I would find it difficult to
reason why it should be treated differently than osmose, osmosis and all
the other confusingly similarly named apps, tools and so on.

In any case we shouldn't exaggerate the size of the issue, we have lots
and lots of applications in osm space that don't have the naming issues
and just as with the domain names, the -actual- number of things we need
to look at is small and I'm sure we'll find workable solutions for them.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20170805/45f85312/attachment.sig>

More information about the talk mailing list