[License-discuss] Protecting database integrity

[Grahame Grieve]

you can do the same - you can release the code under open source license,
but use the trademark to ensure certain policies are followed.

The community will probably ignore your code if they don't like the
policies.

Grahame


On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 4:18 PM, John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> wrote:

>
> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Terrence Bull <terrence at woogloo.com>
> wrote:
>
> I do wonder how Google makes Android open source yet requires everyone
>> that makes ‘copies’ to be connected to the Play store. Do they have some
>> sort of special open source license they use?
>>
>
> No, the license is straight Apache 2.0, except for the proprietary parts
> that control the radio and the sensors.  Google's leverage over Android
> manufacturers comes from the Android trademark, which they license only to
> OEMs who follow their rules, and from the fact that they give advance
> copies of new releases to those same OEMs.
>
> --
> John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
> Don't be so humble.  You're not that great.
>         --Golda Meir
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at opensource.org
> https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
>
>


-- 
-----
http://www.healthintersections.com.au / grahame at healthintersections.com.au
/ +61 411 867 065
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20170306/571f08aa/attachment.html>