New subject: Linux trademark fees for non-profit organisations

30 Jun 2005

Daniel,

We are still tuning the web site and its verbiage.  Your points are well taken.

daniel(a)linuxaudio.org said:
...
  However, I think the way that this is being handled,
with the threat  of
 legal action against legitmate non-profit Linux groups who don't  pay up, is
 wrong.  ....

...
  "If you know of entities or persons using the
Linux mark without a  license
 and without the required legend, please notify us with the  details. We will
 then contact that entity or person and attempt to negotiate a license
 agreement with them, or will take such other further legal action as might
 be necessary." 
As in most Legal things, every word is important.  You missed the word
"negotiate".  What is most important to us is that the Mark be sublicensed
properly.  If people are not willing to help us do this, both for LMI's interest
and for their own, then maybe they should not be using the Mark.  On the other
hand, we DO listen.

...
  That would be a good idea. Have you asked Bruce
Perens? It was his  concern
 about the Debian-compatibility of the LMI sublicence that  brought this
 matter to our attention. 
We are currently working with Bruce to meet his concerns.  We do not anticipate
any changes to the license itself.  We believe that Bruce misinterpreted the
license.  We would have preferred Bruce coming to us with questions and issues
before going to the Debian community.  If he had, we probably would have been
able to get much further than we are right now, but that is water over the dam.

We plan on creating a FAQ that explains some of the harder points of law in
more understandable terms.  The tricky part of that is not to compromise what
is needed by the legalese to protect the Mark by having an interpretation in
English that does not accurately reflect the legalese.

...
  However, the actual licence text, by setting an annual
fee for  non-profits,
 seems to contradict it's own fair use provisions.   
The term "fair use" is a very legal term, and has very specific needs.  I can
not just say that your use of the term "Linux" is "fair use" just
because it
fits the definition of what you and I might consider "fair".

...
 As far as linuxaudio.org is concerned, we could help
that effort by 
putting 'LINUXÂ® is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds' 
This would be a wonderful thing, and would help to protect the Mark in any
case.

All I can do is say that LMI is doing its best to protect the Mark, and none of
the members of LMI or OSDL wants to make the use of the Mark any harder than
we absolutely must.

Of all the things I do, this is the least enjoyable, but I am well aware of the
dynamics of the FOSS community, and LMI is working to both protect the Mark
and make it available, something extremely tricky under Trademark law.

Having said all this, I beg to be quiet about this at this point so I can
prepare for a board meeting where I will discuss your concerns and feedback
with the attornies and other board members.

md
-- 
Jon "maddog" Hall
Executive Director           Linux International(R)
email: maddog(a)li.org         80 Amherst St. 
Voice: +1.603.672.4557       Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A.
WWW: http://www.li.org

Board Member: Uniforum Association, USENIX Association

(R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries.
(R)Linux International is a registered trademark in the USA used pursuant
   to a license from Linux Mark Institute, authorized licensor of Linus
   Torvalds, owner of the Linux trademark on a worldwide basis
(R)UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the USA and other
   countries.

Re: Linux trademark fees for non-profit organisations