4 ms·

Who gives a crap about what they deem acceptable. That's definitely non-enforceable in cases like "ubuntusucks.com"

• comice 13y ago
  I am talking about this instance where Joey Hess is suggesting Debian cannot use the trademark without risking trouble. I don't happen to agree with Canonical's behaviour in this respect, or believe it's enforceable.
  • smellf 13y ago
    He isn't suggesting Debian can't use Canonical's trademark, he's future-proofing/drawing attention to Canonical's newest fall from grace.
    • comice 13y ago
      meh, he's quite clearly drawing attention +by+ suggesting it.
• jasonlotito 13y ago
  Well, the original problem wasn't ubuntusucks.com, but fixubuntu.com with the Ubuntu logo. One could make the argument that those two things combined without a clear disclaimer at the very least could be an issue. I do think Canonical's approach was far too heavy-handed, but this case is nothing like ubuntusucks.com (on multiple levels =)).
  • chrismonsanto 13y ago
    I am of course not referring to this particular instance, but posing a counterexample to the overly broad language in their intellectual property policy.