[UOML] License for approval

[Matthew Flaschen]

Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> Wang Donglin wrote:
>>> Trademark is not a good choice for our case. UOML is a new standard, 
>>> has not
>>> been recognized by end user. Not use UOML trademark is not a big loss.
>>> Trademark can't prevent verdor to develope their own software based 
>>> on open
>>> source contribution, not conform with UOML standard while don't use UOML
>>> trademark.
> 
> You shouldn't be able to prevent that.  If your license does,  it 
> violates OSD #6, OSD #8, and OSD #10

The comment I replied to ("Trademark is not a good choice [...]") was by 
Wang Donglin, not Brian Behlendorf.  I incorrectly attributed it by 
mistake in my last email.

Matt Flaschen