4 ms·
It seems like the distro name may violate the Git trademark policy [0]. From [1]: > ... you can't use the mark in a way that implies association with or endors
by mrmr1993 9y ago
It seems like the distro name may violate the Git trademark policy [0]. From [1]:
> ... you can't use the mark in a way that implies association with or endorsement by the Git project.
It might be worth checking with the Git project to see if they would approve this use or find it within their allowed uses.
- Shoothe 9y agoI agree. Usually names in format XY where X is a trademark are considered infringing. See several cases of projects named docker-something or Windows Subsystem for Linux, a name that technically doesn't make sense but "for X" names are usually OK.
- bmarkovic 9y agoEr.. Github, gitlab, gitkraken.. I don't think having git in the name is enough to violate that clause
- eat_veggies 9y agoThose all got written permission to use the name. See a similar discussion from a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15991785 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15991785
- jwilk 9y ago404 Footnote Not Found
- mrmr1993 9y agoLooks like the gremlins ate them, sorry! [0]: https://git-scm.com/trademark https://git-scm.com/trademark [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw@sigill.intra.peff.net/ https://public-inbox.org/git/20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw...
- trendia 9y agoDoes GitHub have to pay a fee to use Git in their name?
- mrmr1993 9y agoFrom https://public-inbox.org/git/20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw@sigill.intra.peff.net/ https://public-inbox.org/git/20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw... > The USPTO initially rejected our application as confusingly similar to the existing trademark on GitHub, which was filed in 2008. While one might imagine where the "Git" in GitHub comes from, by the time we applied to the USPTO, both marks had been widely used in parallel for years. So we worked out an agreement with GitHub which basically says "we are mutually OK with the other trademark existing".