6 ms·
https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ has similar language (but with defined parameters) . I just read the linked (rust
by gladiatr72 4y ago
https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ has similar language (but with defined parameters) . I just read the linked (rust tm) doc. It is still in the draft phase and there are links for community comment and feedback.
In other words (at this stage) it doesn't look like they're trying to encumber the general use of the word _rust_ or the act of referring to the language by its given name.
- torstenvl 4y ago> [S]tating accurately that software is written in the Python programming language, that it is compatible with the Python programming language, or that it contains the Python programming language, is always allowed. In those cases, you may use the word "Python" or the unaltered logos to indicate this, without our prior approval. This is true both for non-commercial and commercial uses.... This clause overrides other clauses of this policy. I don't think they're that similar. Python is fairly permissive about use of its trademark in a way that won't cause dilution. In addition to the fact that Python is less strident about use of the term "Python," Python is also explicitly a "Benevolent Dictator For Life" language. Rust, on the other hand, seems to try to position itself as entirely open, despite all of the heavy-handed restrictive steps it takes.
- gladiatr72 4y agoNah. Python quit the BDFL scene when Guido stepped down. My point was simply that there are general commonalities between the two and that the linked rust document is in the early draft phase. Hey, they might fuck it up, but as of today, they have not.
- torstenvl 4y agoEven the Rust trademark policy as it exists now is significantly more restrictive than the Python trademark policy.