8 ms·

Rust Is Dead to Me

54 points by stargrave 4y ago

koito17 4y ago
Am I the only one that feels a lot of parallels between Rust's trademark policy and Mozilla's trademark policies in general? IIRC the Mozilla Public License is very restrictive on usage of logos, branding, etc. to the point where patching software to run on your OS would violate it[1]. So I am not too surprised by what Rust has been doing. I definitely don't like it, but whatever, there's enough fights out there to choose from, and Rust's trademark policy is not one I'm picking. [1] https://github.com/jasperla/openbsd-wip/issues/86 https://github.com/jasperla/openbsd-wip/issues/86
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  Mozilla isn't a language. Rust isn't an application.
- arp242 4y ago
  Pale Moon has no relation to Mozilla at all; other than being a fork of Firefox of course. It's a pretty small niche project, and I found the Pale Moon people in general to be rather, ehm, off-putting, to put it nicely, and that Tobin guy who created the issue particularly unpleasant (IIRC he managed to get banned from Pale Moon). Either way, I think the situations are a bit different; naming libraries "$langname-foo" or variations thereof is common in many languages; and I don't think anyone is really confused by this. Attempting to ban the usage of $langname in package and domain names is unheard of AFAIK. Ruby on Rails, godoc.org, gobyexample.com, and many others would be disallowed under this policy. And as much as I disagree with the author's stance on guns, putting it in a Trademark policy seems ... weird.
echelon 4y ago
The Rust Foundation is absolute bonkers and they don't deserve stewardship of the language. Here's a fantastic video on the controversy: https://youtu.be/gutR_LNoZw0 https://youtu.be/gutR_LNoZw0 I can't believe this petty, in-group absurdity. It's Home Owners Association-level bullshit the likes of which I've never seen before in the software community. They've created thousands of ways you can't create Rust events or even associate yourself with the language. It's 100% exclusionary and seems to go well beyond trademark protection. The language doesn't belong to them. I'm half minded to fork Rust and call it "Crust" or "Crab Language".
- adastra22 4y ago
  > I'm half minded to fork Rust and call it "Crust" or "Crab Language". Please do. I'll use it.
lxe 4y ago
Why is carrying a firearm such a "hill people choose to die on" item?
- lylejantzi3rd 4y ago
  This an odd question to ask less than a week after Bob Lee was stabbed to death.
  - a_bonobo 4y ago
    Interestingly, if you have a gun, you're more likely to die of homicide https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-... Quote: >Every time a gun in the home was used in self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were >four unintentional shootings, >seven criminal assaults or homicides, >and 11 attempted or completed suicides. The data does not support that having a gun makes you safer
    - lylejantzi3rd 4y ago
      That's simply not true.
- obarthelemy 4y ago
  Also, a hill they're choosing to kill kids on, which bothers me more.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - dang 4y ago
    Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
dpecos 4y ago
Honestly, if you think it’s weird not to allow you to have your firearm in a conference, I think you should think twice about it. If it’s a dangerous place, why do you even go? And if it’s not, why the hell would you even need an firearm? I don’t care if you have a permit or not, just the mentality of “I’m going to defend my wife and myself” sounds nuts to anyone not in the states. IMHO that was the only statement from the rust foundation that I could relate to: it makes feel safer knowing that people like you won’t be able to bring guns to these events.
- echelon 4y ago
  > if you think it’s weird not to allow you to have your firearm in a conference, I think you should think twice about it. This means you can't legally have a conference in the state of Georgia on any public property (including universities). The state of Georgia requires venue and event organizers to allow firearms in public, state owned, or university locations. We recently had Music Midtown, one our biggest music festivals with decades of rich history and major headliners, permanently shutter because they tried to prohibit guns and got sued. These rules have unintended consequences. It's cute to try to be political, but this just excludes people.
  - obarthelemy 4y ago
    So, people who don't want guns around them, kids, drunks, are the ones at fault ?
  - adastra22 4y ago
    Duly noted. I won't ever host any conference on public property in Georgia. If you want to bring a weapon to my conference, you are not welcome.
    - echelon 4y ago
      Do you realize that they want to bring a gun mostly because you don't want them to? By speaking the words "guns not invited" into the universe, you draw an intense desire from many gun advocates to respond. It's just polarization on one side leading to more polarization on the other side. The more one party pushes, the more the other pushes back. It's a self-amplifying feedback loop. The only reason they want to do any of this is because their needs (in an abstract sense) are not being met. Because the system is inadequate at addressing everyone's needs, regardless of belief or party affiliation. This is mimetic tribalism, where the players think that their tribe can better meet their needs and insecurities. Guns aren't even what this is about. In any case, I'm annoyed that the Rust Foundation finds it worth their time to play these games.
realitysballs 4y ago
I’m an American and I think we should revoke the 2nd amendment. Who wants to live in a guns first society?
- falcolas 4y ago
  As someone who lives around bears, mountain lions, and wolves (in the US), guns are a reasonable thing to have available. I’ve personally run across all three of those without leaving my local urban area. Mind you, I’m thinking of hunting rifles and revolvers generally, not assault rifles.
  - realitysballs 4y ago
    What is more dangerous, a random stranger with a gun or a bear? Can you conceive of a way to live in proximity to these animals without a firearm? Would our country be better off if the average citizen did not have such easy access to guns & ammunition?
    - falcolas 4y ago
      > What is more dangerous, a random stranger with a gun or a bear? So far, neither has harmed (major or minor) me or my extended family in any way. And I live within a few miles of places where people regularly hunt; in a deep red state with a long history of hunting and trapping and carrying firearms (open, concealed, and in vehicles). Which one has come closer to being dangerous to me and mine? A bear. I've been at more risk of being mauled by a bear (driving down a road on an ATV and ending up between a mama and her cub) than being shot (haven't noticed a gun being pointed in my direction, no mass shootings within several hundred miles of my home). And bears, if you're near their territory, are damned dangerous. They're wild animals who love to come into our places because we have free food (our trash). Bear spray, a long touted alternative, doesn't work on an angry bear. It doesn't even always work on an angry human. > Can you conceive of a way to live in proximity to these animals without a firearm? Not without sacrificing lives or property. Wild animals don't respect fences and property lines. And they regularly threaten people, pets, and livestock. Additionally, IMO, a bullet is kinder than poison (which is what the Bureau of Wildlife Management uses). > Would our country be better off if the average citizen did not have such easy access to guns & ammunition? Hunting rifles and revolvers (as I called out in my original message)? I don't believe so. And my position is based on US history, where we've had access to these kinds of firearms for centuries. Assault rifles and semi-automatic pistols? An unambiguous yes.
jhanschoo 4y ago
See also: Java logo and mark guidelines (also cf. javascript/ECMAScript, mysql): https://www.oracle.com/legal/trademarks.html https://www.oracle.com/legal/trademarks.html https://www.oracle.com/a/ocom/docs/java-licensing-logo-guidelines-1908204.pdf https://www.oracle.com/a/ocom/docs/java-licensing-logo-guide... Google's attempt to trademark Go: https://trademarks.justia.com/881/00/go-88100955.html https://trademarks.justia.com/881/00/go-88100955.html Python trademark usage guidelines: https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ Perl trademark usage guidelines: https://www.perlfoundation.org/trademarks.html https://www.perlfoundation.org/trademarks.html Ruby is a counterexample!: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/logo/ https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/logo/ PHP seems to be a counterexample!: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/logo/ https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/logo/ PostgreSQL: https://www.postgresql.org/about/policies/trademarks/ https://www.postgresql.org/about/policies/trademarks/ Linux: https://lmi.linuxfoundation.org/ https://lmi.linuxfoundation.org/ https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/trademark-usage https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/trademark-usage there are many more, but you get the idea I know a couple streamers/youtubers have made a big fuss about this (idk about actual developer sentiment), but I don't see why this situation is anything exceptional or to be worried about.
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  A thing can be both common and unreasonable at the same time.
  - jhanschoo 4y ago
    But one wonders: the same criticisms can be levied at these other cases, yet one finds that googling about controversies regarding them (well except Oracle) turns up little. Considering how well-established these are, one would expect that if trademarking it were truly unreasonable, we'd see a similar argument already. The more obvious reason is that you have a couple loud voices who don't know what they're talking about and see that these actions actually either do little harm or even benefit the community (regarding the latter, e.g. making it obvious when a couple blessed and vetted, officially supported high-quality resources are being provided).
readthenotes1 4y ago
"You may make promotional goods for free giveaway at open source conferences and events provided that the goods are in good taste and compatible with the values of the Project." Wow. "Good taste". No rusty dildoes?
rich_sasha 4y ago
Weird gun moans aside, what about the rest of it? I'm not familiar with usual T&C's for this kind of software foundations, but they seem excessive. Can't use the word "rust" in a conference name, product name, can't sell swag... I mean, I get they need to protect the name and want some kind of exclusive stewardship but this seems OTT for an open source software project. Or am I wrong?
obarthelemy 4y ago
Lol. My gun is not welcome, so I'm not welcome. Whiny snowflake much ? How insecure can one be ? Conferences are much safer for not NOT allowing guns. Don't play the victim, and don't hurt anyone please. As for trademark control, well, that's the way the world is. "Rust" is reserved for official Rust products. If youhave an issue with copyrights and stuff, go vote accordingly, but Rust doesn't have much of a choice unless they want to let "Rust" go public domain and let any and every one use it w/o any control.
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. Edit: you posted a whole bunch of flamewar comments. Can you please not do that on HN, regardless of how wrong other people are or you feel they are, or how provocative something in an article is or you feel it is? We're trying for a different kind of conversation here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - obarthelemy 4y ago
    You can't normalize carrying guns at dev conferences. If you let someone mention that in an "issues about a language" post, we must be able to point out a) how unrelated the 2 are and b) how murderous guns and gun-carriers are. Guns were banned at an NRA conference. That's their own opinion on guns and gun carriers. Stop killing kids.
    - dang 4y ago
      All that is orthogonal to whether you broke HN's rules or not. You broke them badly. That's not cool. We have to ban accounts that do that, and I don't want to ban you so I'm asking you not to do it again.
- adastra22 4y ago
  > Rust doesn't have much of a choice unless they want to let "Rust" go public domain and let any and every one use it w/o any control. And that would be bad because....? This is an open-source programming language, not a business. IMHO it shouldn't even be trademarked.
xiphias2 4y ago
,,I have a concealed carry permit'' This is crazy, as a European who lived in a peaceful world all my life I believe it should be illegal to conceal any deadly weapon. A person who does that is danger to everybody. I understand the right for people protecting their own home and being able to protest violently against their government in a need, but going to a conference is none of these. There are pepper sprays that are good for self defence without being able to kill people, why not use those?
- falcolas 4y ago
  Pepper spray is not guaranteed to work. Or work in time. Unless you hit their eyes directly, it’s an annoyance in the moment. Of course, guns have similar drawbacks. Adrenaline is fascinating stuff.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- obarthelemy 4y ago
  Yeah. Weak masculinity. You can't drive drunk but you can drink and carry ? Around kids and from 18 ? How could that go wrong ?
peter-m80 4y ago
USA Circus
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't add nationalistic flamewar hell on top of other flamewar hell. It only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
vulgarr 4y ago
[dead]
neilv 4y ago
Wrong lede, IMHO. The article starts with the desire to attend Rust conferences while strapped with firepower. Unfortunately, that's a loaded (ha) topic, which I'd guess will alienate maybe half the readers of the article, before they learn that there's things in the draft that do bother them... Just flipping around the draft, I see things like this: > 5.1.2 Websites > You may use the Word Marks and Logos, but not the Trade Dress, on your webpage to show your support for the Project as long as: I think anyone will use these terms and senses of "Rust", "Cargo", and "Clippy" on Web pages for most whatever purposes they want, not only to "show [their] support for the Project". There's more in the draft like that. At first glance, this Rust Trademark Policy looks like it could function like a treaty amongst a handful of megacorps. It could also be used to carve out of a fiefdom. Rust is clearly designed for systems programmers. Systems programmers learn to be savvy about standards and vendor dependencies, and (when they have a choice) to weigh what they invest in. Personally, I'm all for open standards, building solid systems, and "defending the Internet". I don't yet know what to make of this document.
throwaway202303 4y ago
This is yet another example of Rust people forcing their political messages on people. Most techies are progressive to the point of cringe and have no understanding of the issues they are pontificating about. if someone has a legal right to carry a weapon in their state do not demand that right be taken away for a frivolous reason
- Thiez 4y ago
  How is "I don't want to be shot during a programming convention" a frivolous reason?
  - throwaway202303 4y ago
    Conferences typically don’t have metal detectors and bag search. If someone wants to shoot you at a conference nothing stands in their way. By stopping a legal gun carry you are achieving nothing much more than punishing someone for exercising a right you don’t like
- jacknews 4y ago
  Guns have no place at a programming language conference, it's as simple as that, it's not about imposing politics. I'm sure they don't care if attendees carry weapons outside of the conference, they're not saying gun owners are not licensed to use rust or anything.
  - throwaway202303 4y ago
    “It’s not politics, just everyone should think the same as me because I am right.”
  - scoutt 4y ago
    > Guns have no place at a programming language conference I don't have anything against a rule about not carrying weapons... but why mention it in a trademark draft? I am sure we both can think about a lot of things that "have no place at a programming language conference", but surprisingly these are not included in that draft. Why?
Communitivity 4y ago
The below language in the draft seems to indicate that the R@$! foundation will have a lock on all paid training courses, meaning professional trainers will need to get a license agreement to operate (presumably with a fee of some kind). Personally, I think we should all start using R@$! in place of the trademark, until this debacle is dead and buried. "I am running an event for which I am charging attendees for tickets. Can I use the Rust Logo on my promotional materials? If your event is for-profit, you will need approval to use the Rust name or Logo. If you are simply covering costs and the event is non-profit, you may use the Rust name or Logo as long as it is clear that the event is not endorsed by the Rust Foundation. You are free to use Ferris the crab without permission."
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  Not being a lawyer I can only hope that this is simply embarassing and unenforceable. The logo, maybe, but the name? I don't see how anyone can prevent anyone else from simply referring to them by their factual name. It's absurd. Which makes it embarassing and enlightening that they try. A quick google: "simply because the use of another’s trademark is unauthorized by the trademark owner does not make it an infringing use" https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications/blt/2016/02/03_friedman/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications... So even the logo doesn't grant quite that level of control. Basically someone needs to get over themselves.

54 points by stargrave 4y ago

Am I the only one that feels a lot of parallels between Rust's trademark policy and Mozilla's trademark policies in general? IIRC the Mozilla Public License is very restrictive on usage of logos, branding, etc. to the point where patching software to run on your OS would violate it[1]. So I am not too surprised by what Rust has been doing. I definitely don't like it, but whatever, there's enough fights out there to choose from, and Rust's trademark policy is not one I'm picking. [1] https://github.com/jasperla/openbsd-wip/issues/86 https://github.com/jasperla/openbsd-wip/issues/86

Brian_K_White 4y ago
Mozilla isn't a language. Rust isn't an application.
arp242 4y ago
Pale Moon has no relation to Mozilla at all; other than being a fork of Firefox of course. It's a pretty small niche project, and I found the Pale Moon people in general to be rather, ehm, off-putting, to put it nicely, and that Tobin guy who created the issue particularly unpleasant (IIRC he managed to get banned from Pale Moon). Either way, I think the situations are a bit different; naming libraries "$langname-foo" or variations thereof is common in many languages; and I don't think anyone is really confused by this. Attempting to ban the usage of $langname in package and domain names is unheard of AFAIK. Ruby on Rails, godoc.org, gobyexample.com, and many others would be disallowed under this policy. And as much as I disagree with the author's stance on guns, putting it in a Trademark policy seems ... weird.

echelon 4y ago

The Rust Foundation is absolute bonkers and they don't deserve stewardship of the language. Here's a fantastic video on the controversy: https://youtu.be/gutR_LNoZw0 https://youtu.be/gutR_LNoZw0 I can't believe this petty, in-group absurdity. It's Home Owners Association-level bullshit the likes of which I've never seen before in the software community. They've created thousands of ways you can't create Rust events or even associate yourself with the language. It's 100% exclusionary and seems to go well beyond trademark protection. The language doesn't belong to them. I'm half minded to fork Rust and call it "Crust" or "Crab Language".

adastra22 4y ago
> I'm half minded to fork Rust and call it "Crust" or "Crab Language". Please do. I'll use it.

lxe 4y ago

Why is carrying a firearm such a "hill people choose to die on" item?

lylejantzi3rd 4y ago
This an odd question to ask less than a week after Bob Lee was stabbed to death.
- a_bonobo 4y ago
  Interestingly, if you have a gun, you're more likely to die of homicide https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-... Quote: >Every time a gun in the home was used in self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were >four unintentional shootings, >seven criminal assaults or homicides, >and 11 attempted or completed suicides. The data does not support that having a gun makes you safer
  - lylejantzi3rd 4y ago
    That's simply not true.
obarthelemy 4y ago
Also, a hill they're choosing to kill kids on, which bothers me more.
Ekaros 4y ago
[flagged]
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

dpecos 4y ago

Honestly, if you think it’s weird not to allow you to have your firearm in a conference, I think you should think twice about it. If it’s a dangerous place, why do you even go? And if it’s not, why the hell would you even need an firearm? I don’t care if you have a permit or not, just the mentality of “I’m going to defend my wife and myself” sounds nuts to anyone not in the states. IMHO that was the only statement from the rust foundation that I could relate to: it makes feel safer knowing that people like you won’t be able to bring guns to these events.

echelon 4y ago
> if you think it’s weird not to allow you to have your firearm in a conference, I think you should think twice about it. This means you can't legally have a conference in the state of Georgia on any public property (including universities). The state of Georgia requires venue and event organizers to allow firearms in public, state owned, or university locations. We recently had Music Midtown, one our biggest music festivals with decades of rich history and major headliners, permanently shutter because they tried to prohibit guns and got sued. These rules have unintended consequences. It's cute to try to be political, but this just excludes people.
- obarthelemy 4y ago
  So, people who don't want guns around them, kids, drunks, are the ones at fault ?
- adastra22 4y ago
  Duly noted. I won't ever host any conference on public property in Georgia. If you want to bring a weapon to my conference, you are not welcome.
  - echelon 4y ago
    Do you realize that they want to bring a gun mostly because you don't want them to? By speaking the words "guns not invited" into the universe, you draw an intense desire from many gun advocates to respond. It's just polarization on one side leading to more polarization on the other side. The more one party pushes, the more the other pushes back. It's a self-amplifying feedback loop. The only reason they want to do any of this is because their needs (in an abstract sense) are not being met. Because the system is inadequate at addressing everyone's needs, regardless of belief or party affiliation. This is mimetic tribalism, where the players think that their tribe can better meet their needs and insecurities. Guns aren't even what this is about. In any case, I'm annoyed that the Rust Foundation finds it worth their time to play these games.

realitysballs 4y ago

I’m an American and I think we should revoke the 2nd amendment. Who wants to live in a guns first society?

falcolas 4y ago
As someone who lives around bears, mountain lions, and wolves (in the US), guns are a reasonable thing to have available. I’ve personally run across all three of those without leaving my local urban area. Mind you, I’m thinking of hunting rifles and revolvers generally, not assault rifles.
- realitysballs 4y ago
  What is more dangerous, a random stranger with a gun or a bear? Can you conceive of a way to live in proximity to these animals without a firearm? Would our country be better off if the average citizen did not have such easy access to guns & ammunition?
  - falcolas 4y ago
    > What is more dangerous, a random stranger with a gun or a bear? So far, neither has harmed (major or minor) me or my extended family in any way. And I live within a few miles of places where people regularly hunt; in a deep red state with a long history of hunting and trapping and carrying firearms (open, concealed, and in vehicles). Which one has come closer to being dangerous to me and mine? A bear. I've been at more risk of being mauled by a bear (driving down a road on an ATV and ending up between a mama and her cub) than being shot (haven't noticed a gun being pointed in my direction, no mass shootings within several hundred miles of my home). And bears, if you're near their territory, are damned dangerous. They're wild animals who love to come into our places because we have free food (our trash). Bear spray, a long touted alternative, doesn't work on an angry bear. It doesn't even always work on an angry human. > Can you conceive of a way to live in proximity to these animals without a firearm? Not without sacrificing lives or property. Wild animals don't respect fences and property lines. And they regularly threaten people, pets, and livestock. Additionally, IMO, a bullet is kinder than poison (which is what the Bureau of Wildlife Management uses). > Would our country be better off if the average citizen did not have such easy access to guns & ammunition? Hunting rifles and revolvers (as I called out in my original message)? I don't believe so. And my position is based on US history, where we've had access to these kinds of firearms for centuries. Assault rifles and semi-automatic pistols? An unambiguous yes.

jhanschoo 4y ago

See also: Java logo and mark guidelines (also cf. javascript/ECMAScript, mysql): https://www.oracle.com/legal/trademarks.html https://www.oracle.com/legal/trademarks.html https://www.oracle.com/a/ocom/docs/java-licensing-logo-guidelines-1908204.pdf https://www.oracle.com/a/ocom/docs/java-licensing-logo-guide... Google's attempt to trademark Go: https://trademarks.justia.com/881/00/go-88100955.html https://trademarks.justia.com/881/00/go-88100955.html Python trademark usage guidelines: https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ Perl trademark usage guidelines: https://www.perlfoundation.org/trademarks.html https://www.perlfoundation.org/trademarks.html Ruby is a counterexample!: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/logo/ https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/logo/ PHP seems to be a counterexample!: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/logo/ https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/logo/ PostgreSQL: https://www.postgresql.org/about/policies/trademarks/ https://www.postgresql.org/about/policies/trademarks/ Linux: https://lmi.linuxfoundation.org/ https://lmi.linuxfoundation.org/ https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/trademark-usage https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/trademark-usage there are many more, but you get the idea I know a couple streamers/youtubers have made a big fuss about this (idk about actual developer sentiment), but I don't see why this situation is anything exceptional or to be worried about.

Brian_K_White 4y ago
A thing can be both common and unreasonable at the same time.
- jhanschoo 4y ago
  But one wonders: the same criticisms can be levied at these other cases, yet one finds that googling about controversies regarding them (well except Oracle) turns up little. Considering how well-established these are, one would expect that if trademarking it were truly unreasonable, we'd see a similar argument already. The more obvious reason is that you have a couple loud voices who don't know what they're talking about and see that these actions actually either do little harm or even benefit the community (regarding the latter, e.g. making it obvious when a couple blessed and vetted, officially supported high-quality resources are being provided).

readthenotes1 4y ago

"You may make promotional goods for free giveaway at open source conferences and events provided that the goods are in good taste and compatible with the values of the Project." Wow. "Good taste". No rusty dildoes?

rich_sasha 4y ago

Weird gun moans aside, what about the rest of it? I'm not familiar with usual T&C's for this kind of software foundations, but they seem excessive. Can't use the word "rust" in a conference name, product name, can't sell swag... I mean, I get they need to protect the name and want some kind of exclusive stewardship but this seems OTT for an open source software project. Or am I wrong?

obarthelemy 4y ago

Lol. My gun is not welcome, so I'm not welcome. Whiny snowflake much ? How insecure can one be ? Conferences are much safer for not NOT allowing guns. Don't play the victim, and don't hurt anyone please. As for trademark control, well, that's the way the world is. "Rust" is reserved for official Rust products. If youhave an issue with copyrights and stuff, go vote accordingly, but Rust doesn't have much of a choice unless they want to let "Rust" go public domain and let any and every one use it w/o any control.

dang 4y ago
Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. Edit: you posted a whole bunch of flamewar comments. Can you please not do that on HN, regardless of how wrong other people are or you feel they are, or how provocative something in an article is or you feel it is? We're trying for a different kind of conversation here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- obarthelemy 4y ago
  You can't normalize carrying guns at dev conferences. If you let someone mention that in an "issues about a language" post, we must be able to point out a) how unrelated the 2 are and b) how murderous guns and gun-carriers are. Guns were banned at an NRA conference. That's their own opinion on guns and gun carriers. Stop killing kids.
  - dang 4y ago
    All that is orthogonal to whether you broke HN's rules or not. You broke them badly. That's not cool. We have to ban accounts that do that, and I don't want to ban you so I'm asking you not to do it again.
adastra22 4y ago
> Rust doesn't have much of a choice unless they want to let "Rust" go public domain and let any and every one use it w/o any control. And that would be bad because....? This is an open-source programming language, not a business. IMHO it shouldn't even be trademarked.

xiphias2 4y ago

,,I have a concealed carry permit'' This is crazy, as a European who lived in a peaceful world all my life I believe it should be illegal to conceal any deadly weapon. A person who does that is danger to everybody. I understand the right for people protecting their own home and being able to protest violently against their government in a need, but going to a conference is none of these. There are pepper sprays that are good for self defence without being able to kill people, why not use those?

falcolas 4y ago
Pepper spray is not guaranteed to work. Or work in time. Unless you hit their eyes directly, it’s an annoyance in the moment. Of course, guns have similar drawbacks. Adrenaline is fascinating stuff.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
obarthelemy 4y ago
Yeah. Weak masculinity. You can't drive drunk but you can drink and carry ? Around kids and from 18 ? How could that go wrong ?

peter-m80 4y ago

USA Circus

dang 4y ago
Please don't add nationalistic flamewar hell on top of other flamewar hell. It only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

vulgarr 4y ago

[dead]

neilv 4y ago

Wrong lede, IMHO. The article starts with the desire to attend Rust conferences while strapped with firepower. Unfortunately, that's a loaded (ha) topic, which I'd guess will alienate maybe half the readers of the article, before they learn that there's things in the draft that do bother them... Just flipping around the draft, I see things like this: > 5.1.2 Websites > You may use the Word Marks and Logos, but not the Trade Dress, on your webpage to show your support for the Project as long as: I think anyone will use these terms and senses of "Rust", "Cargo", and "Clippy" on Web pages for most whatever purposes they want, not only to "show [their] support for the Project". There's more in the draft like that. At first glance, this Rust Trademark Policy looks like it could function like a treaty amongst a handful of megacorps. It could also be used to carve out of a fiefdom. Rust is clearly designed for systems programmers. Systems programmers learn to be savvy about standards and vendor dependencies, and (when they have a choice) to weigh what they invest in. Personally, I'm all for open standards, building solid systems, and "defending the Internet". I don't yet know what to make of this document.

throwaway202303 4y ago

This is yet another example of Rust people forcing their political messages on people. Most techies are progressive to the point of cringe and have no understanding of the issues they are pontificating about. if someone has a legal right to carry a weapon in their state do not demand that right be taken away for a frivolous reason

Thiez 4y ago
How is "I don't want to be shot during a programming convention" a frivolous reason?
- throwaway202303 4y ago
  Conferences typically don’t have metal detectors and bag search. If someone wants to shoot you at a conference nothing stands in their way. By stopping a legal gun carry you are achieving nothing much more than punishing someone for exercising a right you don’t like
jacknews 4y ago
Guns have no place at a programming language conference, it's as simple as that, it's not about imposing politics. I'm sure they don't care if attendees carry weapons outside of the conference, they're not saying gun owners are not licensed to use rust or anything.
- throwaway202303 4y ago
  “It’s not politics, just everyone should think the same as me because I am right.”
- scoutt 4y ago
  > Guns have no place at a programming language conference I don't have anything against a rule about not carrying weapons... but why mention it in a trademark draft? I am sure we both can think about a lot of things that "have no place at a programming language conference", but surprisingly these are not included in that draft. Why?

Communitivity 4y ago

The below language in the draft seems to indicate that the R@$! foundation will have a lock on all paid training courses, meaning professional trainers will need to get a license agreement to operate (presumably with a fee of some kind). Personally, I think we should all start using R@$! in place of the trademark, until this debacle is dead and buried. "I am running an event for which I am charging attendees for tickets. Can I use the Rust Logo on my promotional materials? If your event is for-profit, you will need approval to use the Rust name or Logo. If you are simply covering costs and the event is non-profit, you may use the Rust name or Logo as long as it is clear that the event is not endorsed by the Rust Foundation. You are free to use Ferris the crab without permission."

Brian_K_White 4y ago
Not being a lawyer I can only hope that this is simply embarassing and unenforceable. The logo, maybe, but the name? I don't see how anyone can prevent anyone else from simply referring to them by their factual name. It's absurd. Which makes it embarassing and enlightening that they try. A quick google: "simply because the use of another’s trademark is unauthorized by the trademark owner does not make it an infringing use" https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications/blt/2016/02/03_friedman/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications... So even the logo doesn't grant quite that level of control. Basically someone needs to get over themselves.