Re:The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just ...
by gorenb on Saturday September 02, 2023 @10:03AM
(#37361632)
Yes, a trademark holder can do that, but the problem is that Rust is supposed to be a foundation, a nonprofit. Even if they legally can, I don't think it's that ethical for a nonprofit to do so.
Re:The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just ...
by pohl on Saturday September 02, 2023 @10:13AM
(#37361714)
In case you want a heads-up about a typo in your post: I see the word segway, which is the trademark name of a two-wheeled personal transport device. I believe you meant to use the verb “segue” instead.
Re:The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just ...
by gorenb on Saturday September 02, 2023 @02:41PM
(#37364255)
I did mean to use the word segue, and no, it was not a pun about trademarks. I will fix it.
Re:The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just ...
by grayhatter on Saturday September 02, 2023 @10:43AM
(#37361956)
My understanding is that they can't. Trademark protections, IIRC, extend only as far as to not confuse people as to the source of some product. If you created a parody to complain, and not to sell a competing product, then fair use would apply. Do you have any examples of when a Trademark holder has been able to prevent a parody?
Re:The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just ...
by dragonwriter on Saturday September 02, 2023 @04:07PM
(#37365056)
A nonprofit has as much incentive to aggressively defend branding as a for-profit industry. Deceptive, predatory, and for-profit trading on the branding of a non-profit is just as much of a problem for the non-profit and its mission as the same thing is for a for-profit business.
I don't see what's so unreasonable about the other points.