3 ms·
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
by 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 agoMozilla isn't a language. Rust isn't an application.
- arp242 4y agoPale 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.