> What matters is whether he did or didn't give specific written permission that they could use the name Markdown. It's set in stone on the license. If you're

> What matters is whether he did or didn't give specific written permission that they could use the name Markdown. It's set in stone on the license. If you're going to paste the very same argument multiple times all over this discussion, you should at least first make sure it is correct. It's been explained several times now that this is not how that license works. It doesn't work (not binding) to specify trademark-related things in a copyright license. And anyway a copyright license only affects those bound by the copyright on the work: The work, being the code of Gruber's perl markdown parser. Which this group hasn't used at all. Usage of the name "Markdown" is something which has nothing to do with copyright but trademark law. Trademark law works very differently, definitely not by just writing up a license (like copyright) and simply said: The name Markdown is not trademarked (currently, and given its usage, also probably not in the future).