Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git

Re:Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git by mrmr1993 on Wednesday December 27, 2017 @12:11PM (#16016132)

It seems like the distro name may violate the Git trademark policy [0]. From [1]:

> ... you can't use the mark in a way that implies association with or endorsement by the Git project.

It might be worth checking with the Git project to see if they would approve this use or find it within their allowed uses.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git by Shoothe on Wednesday December 27, 2017 @01:00PM (#16016549)

I agree. Usually names in format XY where X is a trademark are considered infringing. See several cases of projects named docker-something or Windows Subsystem for Linux, a name that technically doesn't make sense but "for X" names are usually OK.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git by bmarkovic on Wednesday December 27, 2017 @01:20PM (#16016676)

Er.. Github, gitlab, gitkraken.. I don't think having git in the name is enough to violate that clause

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git by eat_veggies on Wednesday December 27, 2017 @01:36PM (#16016835)

Those all got written permission to use the name.

See a similar discussion from a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15991785

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git by jwilk on Wednesday December 27, 2017 @03:56PM (#16017962)

404 Footnote Not Found

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git by mrmr1993 on Wednesday December 27, 2017 @04:30PM (#16018201)

Looks like the gremlins ate them, sorry!

[0]: https://git-scm.com/trademark [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git by trendia on Wednesday December 27, 2017 @04:28PM (#16018181)

Does GitHub have to pay a fee to use Git in their name?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gittup, a Linux distro on top of Git by mrmr1993 on Wednesday December 27, 2017 @04:33PM (#16018222)

From https://public-inbox.org/git/20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw...

> The USPTO initially rejected our application as confusingly similar to the existing trademark on GitHub, which was filed in 2008. While one might imagine where the "Git" in GitHub comes from, by the time we applied to the USPTO, both marks had been widely used in parallel for years. So we worked out an agreement with GitHub which basically says "we are mutually OK with the other trademark existing".

[ Parent | on HN ]