Use of "open source"

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Matthew Flaschen (matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu):

> Yes, I really shouldn't mix those up.  Part of it is that the OSI site
> says, "Unfortunately, the term "open source" itself is subject to
> misuse, and because it's descriptive, it can't be protected as a
> trademark (which would have been our first choice)."
> (http://opensource.org/docs/certification_mark.php). Still, I don't
> think OSI is really prepared to litigate over the "open source" term
> itself.

Well said, and I have to admit that I was stretching the point:  OSI
hasn't acted, in general, in ways trademark holders should concerning
the term "open source" if it were to seriously contemplate enforcing
that as a commercial mark under trademark law.  However, that of course
is entirely irrelevant to the legitimacy of OSI's custody.

-- 
Cheers,              "By reading this sentence, you agree to be bound by the 
Rick Moen             terms of the Internet Protocol, version 4, or, at your 
rick at linuxmafia.com   option, any later version."  -- Seth David Schoen