3 ms·

Here's the policy with non-screwed-up formatting: http://drupal.com/trademark http://drupal.com/trademark . Here's the bit that made me go WTF: Examples of

Here's the policy with non-screwed-up formatting: http://drupal.com/trademark http://drupal.com/trademark . Here's the bit that made me go WTF: Examples of "fostering the Drupal software": - a course entitled "How to use Drupal in your business" organized by a local non-profit organization; - an open access monthly journal called "Drupal Coding magazine"; - an open source Apache plugin "JIT Compiler for Drupal"... Examples which do not qualify as "fostering the Drupal software": - creating a Drupal fork "ImprovedDrupal"; - publishing a website "drupalhallofshame.com" with pictures of infamous Drupal contributors. Here's another fun quote: "Exclusively" means that any direct profits generated by using the Drupal trademark, must also be exclusively used to foster the Drupal software. And this part is just hilariously delusional: The use of the Drupal trademark as part of the name of a function, procedure, variable name or similar source code component is also considered "nominative fair use" for which no license is required. Examples: - a procedure called drupal_add_link(); - a constant called DRUPAL_AUTHENTICATED_RID; - a variable named $drupal_tag; - a set of source code files called drupal.module and drupal.js.

jacquesm 17y ago
Here is my response to this nonsense: http://freedrupal5hosting.com/content/welcome http://freedrupal5hosting.com/content/welcome That's 1500 drupal sites less as of the 1st of Jan. 2010. I don't really want to inconvenience the people that have built their site using our service but as of yesterday no more new signups and end of the year it's curtains. There is no way in hell that we can even begin to comply with this trademark policy without destroying what we've built up to date, so we might as well close shop. For me the sticking point is not so much that these restrictions exist but the fact that they are enacted retro-actively. We've done our bit to promote drupal, helped solve some issues, spent time and money on developing a hosting solution around drupal that is 100% automated but I'm more than willing to toss in the towel at this point.
- cousin_it 17y ago
  I don't understand, why doesn't your website mention the trademark policy issue? There's still time for them to revoke it, however improbable that may be.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    It does now. I had not gotten around to editing the page again. strike that, the old version is still up because of a caching bug in drupal. The irony :) I'll wipe the cache and that should fix it, sorry for the confusion and thank you very much for the heads up. Ok, fixed it. thanks again !! It didn't show for me because I was logged in to the administrative section.
    - cousin_it 17y ago
      You're welcome. (Where's that friend button, again?) I just reddited it, let's see how it goes: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/9irly/drupal_trainwreck_new_official_trademark_policy/ http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/9irly/drupal_tr... . The proper response might be to register drupaltrademarkpolicysucks.com , put up explanatory text there, publicize it and wait for the legal action. To my mind, any project that will even consider such legal action doesn't follow the spirit of free software, whatever the letter may be.
      - jacquesm 17y ago
        > The proper response might be to register drupaltrademarkpolicysucks.com , put up explanatory text there, publicize it and wait for the legal action. Excellent idea. Want me to do the registration ? You write the text ;)
        cousin_it 17y ago
        Yeah, let's do this. I'll write an email to you in the next few hours.
- mechanical_fish 17y ago
  There is no way in hell that we can even begin to comply with this trademark policy without destroying what we've built up to date. Let's clarify. Have you been in communication with the trademark holder? Have you asked the trademark holder for permission to use the trademark, and been turned down? What exactly has the trademark holder asked you to do that would "destroy what you have built up to date"? It seems to me that the policy gives you a long list of cases for which you don't have to ask. And, in the remaining cases, all it says is that... you have to ask. So, have you asked? Moreover, from a quick glance at your site it is not obvious to me that you are violating the policy even now. And, if you are, perhaps it can be fixed with a very slight branding change: Invent a company name ("JacquesCorp"), change the domain to "freedrupal5hostingbyjacquescorp.com", and suddenly you get an automatic license under Section A.2: A. You receive an automatic license when: The Drupal trademark is used in a domain name, title of website, title of a seminar, title of a course or title of a software package that... also mentions your trademark (or your trade name, name of your company, name of your organization, or name of your association). [DISCLAIMER: I'm an employee of a company, Acquia, founded by Drupal's founder, Dries Buytaert. However, I do not speak for the company or the Drupal Association, and my half-baked opinions are entirely my own.]
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    No, I did not ask, I can read. I have simply read the requirements and have decided that we can not comply in any way and that there are terms in there that would make me stop using drupal anyway (or wish that I had never started using it). The word 'boycott' is probably applicable here. You've managed to turn a supporter first into a cautious user because of technical issues with your offerings and now into a detractor because of your ridiculous trademark policy. Think of it as the beam (not straw) that broke the camels back. When we started this section of our business this licensing policy did not even exist, we announced our existence on 'drupal.org' and received the impression that such use of the name drupal the way we do it is ok. If there would be any automatic grandfathering for sites that existed prior to this nonsensical trademark policy being dreamed up that would change the situation a little bit, but it would not change my opinion much because of the overall absolutely ridiculous statements made in the policy the way it is worded right now. Even if I could resolve the issue by changing our domain name, the name of the service or anything like that I would point blank refuse to do so because I think the policy as displayed is comparable to the use of submarine patents. There are plenty of people that have created a living around the drupal eco system, they already contribute in many ways by raising awareness, providing hosting, writing software etc. That should be enough payment for the use of the trademark in my opinion, no need to get your hands in everybody's pockets. It's a total loss strategy. Imagine Linus Torvalds, the holder of the Linux trademark creating a policy comparable with this one. The world of free and open source software has just gotten poorer.
Dries 17y ago
The "hilariously delusional" part is actually covered by trademark law but was added in response to questions from key Drupal contributors. Not everyone is an expert in international trademark law.
- cousin_it 17y ago
  Hello. I'm one of the persons who started this debacle (the Vladimir Slepnev from the signature at drupalsucks.com, the want_to_want who submitted the thing to reddit) and would like to add a note of friendliness to the discussion. Apologies if this comes late. Neither of us subscribes to the unacceptable personal attacks on you and your family. We're also pretty much fans of your software; Jacques was basing his business on it, and I'm seriously planning to do the same in the near future. For any new business, voluntarily honoring the policy terms isn't likely to be a big chore - it does seem to be very carefully written in this regard. The issue with the policy (as I see it) is twofold. First, the lack of a grandfather clause or anything to that effect will impact some existing legitimate sites adversely; this is Jacques's complaint. Second, and more importantly for me personally, trying to ensure that domain names mentioning Drupal in a negative manner don't get registered... sounds like a violation of some unspoken honor code of free software. No, Linux Mark doesn't do the same with the trademark it owns - see their FAQ. Neither do I with my open source stuff (which nobody uses, but still). While this issue likely won't drive me away from Drupal, I still feel that going down this path is a mistake. Sorry if I misunderstood your comments, or misrepresented the policy, in any way.

jacquesm 17y ago

Here is my response to this nonsense: http://freedrupal5hosting.com/content/welcome http://freedrupal5hosting.com/content/welcome That's 1500 drupal sites less as of the 1st of Jan. 2010. I don't really want to inconvenience the people that have built their site using our service but as of yesterday no more new signups and end of the year it's curtains. There is no way in hell that we can even begin to comply with this trademark policy without destroying what we've built up to date, so we might as well close shop. For me the sticking point is not so much that these restrictions exist but the fact that they are enacted retro-actively. We've done our bit to promote drupal, helped solve some issues, spent time and money on developing a hosting solution around drupal that is 100% automated but I'm more than willing to toss in the towel at this point.

cousin_it 17y ago
I don't understand, why doesn't your website mention the trademark policy issue? There's still time for them to revoke it, however improbable that may be.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  It does now. I had not gotten around to editing the page again. strike that, the old version is still up because of a caching bug in drupal. The irony :) I'll wipe the cache and that should fix it, sorry for the confusion and thank you very much for the heads up. Ok, fixed it. thanks again !! It didn't show for me because I was logged in to the administrative section.
  - cousin_it 17y ago
    You're welcome. (Where's that friend button, again?) I just reddited it, let's see how it goes: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/9irly/drupal_trainwreck_new_official_trademark_policy/ http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/9irly/drupal_tr... . The proper response might be to register drupaltrademarkpolicysucks.com , put up explanatory text there, publicize it and wait for the legal action. To my mind, any project that will even consider such legal action doesn't follow the spirit of free software, whatever the letter may be.
    - jacquesm 17y ago
      > The proper response might be to register drupaltrademarkpolicysucks.com , put up explanatory text there, publicize it and wait for the legal action. Excellent idea. Want me to do the registration ? You write the text ;)
      - cousin_it 17y ago
        Yeah, let's do this. I'll write an email to you in the next few hours.
mechanical_fish 17y ago
There is no way in hell that we can even begin to comply with this trademark policy without destroying what we've built up to date. Let's clarify. Have you been in communication with the trademark holder? Have you asked the trademark holder for permission to use the trademark, and been turned down? What exactly has the trademark holder asked you to do that would "destroy what you have built up to date"? It seems to me that the policy gives you a long list of cases for which you don't have to ask. And, in the remaining cases, all it says is that... you have to ask. So, have you asked? Moreover, from a quick glance at your site it is not obvious to me that you are violating the policy even now. And, if you are, perhaps it can be fixed with a very slight branding change: Invent a company name ("JacquesCorp"), change the domain to "freedrupal5hostingbyjacquescorp.com", and suddenly you get an automatic license under Section A.2: A. You receive an automatic license when: The Drupal trademark is used in a domain name, title of website, title of a seminar, title of a course or title of a software package that... also mentions your trademark (or your trade name, name of your company, name of your organization, or name of your association). [DISCLAIMER: I'm an employee of a company, Acquia, founded by Drupal's founder, Dries Buytaert. However, I do not speak for the company or the Drupal Association, and my half-baked opinions are entirely my own.]
- jacquesm 17y ago
  No, I did not ask, I can read. I have simply read the requirements and have decided that we can not comply in any way and that there are terms in there that would make me stop using drupal anyway (or wish that I had never started using it). The word 'boycott' is probably applicable here. You've managed to turn a supporter first into a cautious user because of technical issues with your offerings and now into a detractor because of your ridiculous trademark policy. Think of it as the beam (not straw) that broke the camels back. When we started this section of our business this licensing policy did not even exist, we announced our existence on 'drupal.org' and received the impression that such use of the name drupal the way we do it is ok. If there would be any automatic grandfathering for sites that existed prior to this nonsensical trademark policy being dreamed up that would change the situation a little bit, but it would not change my opinion much because of the overall absolutely ridiculous statements made in the policy the way it is worded right now. Even if I could resolve the issue by changing our domain name, the name of the service or anything like that I would point blank refuse to do so because I think the policy as displayed is comparable to the use of submarine patents. There are plenty of people that have created a living around the drupal eco system, they already contribute in many ways by raising awareness, providing hosting, writing software etc. That should be enough payment for the use of the trademark in my opinion, no need to get your hands in everybody's pockets. It's a total loss strategy. Imagine Linus Torvalds, the holder of the Linux trademark creating a policy comparable with this one. The world of free and open source software has just gotten poorer.

Dries 17y ago

The "hilariously delusional" part is actually covered by trademark law but was added in response to questions from key Drupal contributors. Not everyone is an expert in international trademark law.

cousin_it 17y ago
Hello. I'm one of the persons who started this debacle (the Vladimir Slepnev from the signature at drupalsucks.com, the want_to_want who submitted the thing to reddit) and would like to add a note of friendliness to the discussion. Apologies if this comes late. Neither of us subscribes to the unacceptable personal attacks on you and your family. We're also pretty much fans of your software; Jacques was basing his business on it, and I'm seriously planning to do the same in the near future. For any new business, voluntarily honoring the policy terms isn't likely to be a big chore - it does seem to be very carefully written in this regard. The issue with the policy (as I see it) is twofold. First, the lack of a grandfather clause or anything to that effect will impact some existing legitimate sites adversely; this is Jacques's complaint. Second, and more importantly for me personally, trying to ensure that domain names mentioning Drupal in a negative manner don't get registered... sounds like a violation of some unspoken honor code of free software. No, Linux Mark doesn't do the same with the trademark it owns - see their FAQ. Neither do I with my open source stuff (which nobody uses, but still). While this issue likely won't drive me away from Drupal, I still feel that going down this path is a mistake. Sorry if I misunderstood your comments, or misrepresented the policy, in any way.