Legal soundness comes to open source distribution

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Russell Nelson (nelson at crynwr.com):

> They were also wrong.  Oh, we *can* stretch the definition, but
> inventing requirements out of whole cloth is an invitation to a party
> -- party to a lawsuit, that is.

I understand (thanks to Lawrence) the reason why this could create
problems maintaining the certification mark under trademark law.  But I
must admit I can't for the life of me think of any legal theory whereby 
denying certification would be a tort.  Perhaps you could elaborate?

-- 
"Is it not the beauty of an asynchronous form of discussion that one can go and 
make cups of tea, floss the cat, fluff the geraniums, open the kitchen window 
and scream out it with operatic force, volume, and decorum, and then return to 
the vexed glowing letters calmer of mind and soul?" -- The Cube, forum3000.org
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3