3 ms·
The license requires explicit written permission by Gruber before using "Markdown". It's not fuzzy at all about this point. He didn't okay any name like X, he s
by jkrems 12y ago
The license requires explicit written permission by Gruber before using "Markdown". It's not fuzzy at all about this point. He didn't okay any name like X, he said he might approve of a name similar to X. That's not permission of anything yet.
- dragonwriter 12y ago> The license requires explicit written permission by Gruber before using "Markdown". So? Even if the license is relevant to the legality of the use of the name, that has no bearing on whether or not the Common Markdown folks have assumed that Gruber's silence means consent -- they could simply disagree on the legal relevance of the license, and not see Gruber's consent as required.
- cygx 12y agoCopyright law doesn't apply, and Gruber has probably lost any trademark rights when he failed to shut down the various Markdown flavours. I'm not a lawyer and also not especially familiar with the laws in the US, but my guess would be that legally, he might not have a case. Of course there are also questions of morality, but who cares about that ;)
- frowaway001 12y agoThey are neither using Gruber's code nor his spec, so his license doesn't matter to them.