 |
 |
Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]> > But I think it's worth drawing the community's attention to this issue. > Whether it's important that the Trust have the right to legally stop > someone from calling something "Koha" that isn't Koha (the trademark > owner is ultimately going to be the one that has the legal power to > decide what is "really" Koha or not. Which is what, i'm confident, has > LibLime worried, since some parts of the Koha community have already > accused LibLime of calling something "Koha" that is not.) I don't think many care about the Trust having that power, but LibLime having that power is a very scary thought. If they get this trademark, could they try to assert that Koha is only LLEKoha or LLAKoha or whatever their fork is now called and try to obstruct the user community release process? Except, of course, that LibLime is only the inheritor of the first developer, while the Trust is the first user, so the Trust should win out of those two: the buyer of that bespoke software came first. It's a pretty sorry state of affairs that the music+movies control freakery has led to processes that allow this sort of attempted software control freakery. Surely the buyer should have more say over what they call their purchase than the seller? Regards, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and LMS developer, statistician. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire for Koha work http://www.software.coop/products/koha