Factoryjoe (Chris Messina), Flock and Drupal developer, has proposed an interesting idea for what we should do with brands like Drupal that seem to belong to a community. He argues that trademarks don't fit, yet the need to protect the brand from abuse is real. So what's a community to do? Introducing the Community Mark. How does this fit Drupal and what problems will communities run into if they adopt this method?
My favorite quote from his article:
I want to be able to put a stamp on the work that I do within a community that identifies it to the world—that says: Me and a buncha folks made this and we're proud of it. We did it not to make money but out of passion and love and because it's in our nature to create without secondary purposes in mind.
Comments
I think Chris misses the
I think Chris misses the point of a trademark. A trademark is mostly not used to declare "this is mine" but rather for "you may not use it". And I would like to see Drupal being a trademark to prevent it being abused.
Of course we could add a DrupalCM if it gived Chris the warm fuzzies.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
But who is "you"?
Defining who may or may not use the Drupal trademark would be difficult (impossible without the foundation being in place), and would certainly exclude lots of people who might have a valid claim to partial "ownership" of what we've created here.
- Robert Douglass
-----
My Drupal book: Building Online Communities with Drupal, phpBB and WordPress
It should not be used to
It should not be used to exclude anybody who contributed to the project, of course. But there might be groups who label themselves "Drupal" and haven't contributed to the project in any recognizable way.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
protection only
I'm not sure if we agree. IMHO, it should be used only to protect Drupal, the Drupal community and potential clients from scammers who are falsely claiming to offer Drupal-specific services or expertise. Or when someone creates a non-Drupal product and incorporates the Drupal logo to help sell their product when they and their product have no real association with Drupal.
So, for example, if a hosting service puts a Drupal logo on their site even though the hosting service is not at all Drupal friendly. Or a consultant makes undoubtedly false claims about contributing to Drupal development on their website.
Not only
While your points are of course valid, I'd also like to protect the project from people who might offer Drupal related services without contributing back. For example, 'Linux' is a trademark for which use people actually have to pay.
This payment could and should of course be waived for people who contribute in one way or other to the project.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
I partly agree.
But that would be a whole project of its own, however.
Even if I applaud any serious attempt to provide suitable arrangements for something like that, it seems that would take so long that it might be relevant to consider to temporarily use a CM anyway, if possible to "shift" or "add" more later.
Could a CM be used temporarily, or be replaced/"advanced" later?
I guess it could (ref. the TM -> (R) process), but that aspect would need to be clarified in the very beginning of the CM project.
.
--
( Evaluating the long-term route for Drupal 7.x via BackdropCMS at https://www.CMX.zone )
I am not opposed to using
I am not opposed to using CM, I just am saysing that it should not be mistaken to be a replacement for TM.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
I'm with Killes
Let's look at some scenarios:
Okay:
"Company X builds sites using Drupal [logo]."
"This blog brought to you by Drupal [logo]"
"We train developers in the Drupal [logo] framework"
Not Okay:
Name of company: "The Drupal Company"
"Purchase your Drupal license from Company X"
"Drupal [logo] is brought to you by Company X"
"Pay Company X to become Drupal [logo] certified"
Some of these are covered under the GPL. Some of these are all basic trademark issues. Some of these are definite gray areas. The key phrase whenever talking about trademarks is "likelihood of confusion". The alarms go off when it becomes confusing which is Drupal and which is Company X. Or when Company X is making money purely off the Drupal mark. Whatever is done, we need to be sure that the mark is protected.
--= Jeff Robbins | www.lullabot.com =--
Actually, I'd like also
Actually, I'd like also people who make use of Drupal that you lable as "ok" to somehow contribute back to the project.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
Like to
I understand your position, but we don't need 55.000 developers right now do we?
It's good that people will do whatever they can to contribute, and that we all understand the "unwritten contract" that we work under.
It's a social and cultural agreement, and not everyone understands it.
I'd say the three Okays are okay - Period.
But we need some kind of means to put pressure on people with not so benevolent ideas of how to utilize the Drupal name.
Making money strictly from the Drupal name is probably not ok.
If you run a course or a series of courses (certification path... anyone) on Drupal development and configuration, could Drupal.org foundation set up a "partner program" or something like a "sponsor program" - in order to grant "certified" status to good partners and sponsors? Would that be an idea? Or would that just add to the confusion?
Gunnar Langemark
http://www.langemark.com
Serving as a warning/attention until the foundation is set?
Depending on the progress of the CM initiative, of course, perhaps declaring it as a CM can be useful in gaining attention, saying "we are serious about our brand, and will be back later with more teeth"...
I think potential violators would stop and think again if they see a mark like that.
.
--
( Evaluating the long-term route for Drupal 7.x via BackdropCMS at https://www.CMX.zone )
What about things like
What about things like http://www.drupal.com/ (not that I believe having a trade mark would stop that sort of behaviour).
That's exactly the kind of
That's exactly the kind of thing I don't want to see. I am quite sure that one could get him to not use the drupal.com domain if one had a trademark.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
interesting project
This group seems to be trying to the right thing. See their terms of use and about page. The question is whether they will continue to do so once someone builds up the value of a domain.
'Course it would be nice if they weren't using a Wordpress blog to advertise.
I'm still skeptical
OpenDomains will have to address these points a little more carefully before I trust them:
If they said "we would like a link back to OpenDomain.org on all pages", I wouldn't feel that this is so unpleasant. However, who is to stop them from telling you that the link should be to MyPokerOrgyPills.com? Or any other site that wants tasty, high-google-page-rank sites to link to them? Why else would they be so insistent about the rel="nofollow" on all other outgoing links? They're only saying that for the Google page-rank calculus effect. The rest of their terms exists to make sure that Google is willing to index them and let them be involved in Adsense or other programs.
How is this so kind of OpenDomain.org? Why is this "trying to do the right thing"? To me, it looks like a left-handed business venture, not something that expresses concern about open source projects.
Hell. They don't even publish their legally binding terms of service, they only mail them to you after you've requested the use of one of the domains.
If you want to work hard making a great website and have your page rank benefit them and only them, this is a good opportunity for you. If you want to work hard making a great website and not own the domain that you use, this is also for you. If you want to work hard making a great website and always know that one misstep (oops, a link without rel="nofollow") and they have the legal right to take the domain away from you, go ahead, this is right for you.
OK----- Drupal needs a trademark. Gerhard, you convinced me. No more warm fuzzy feelings, the abuse of Drupal.com is enough.
Do we want Drupal.com to become the next http://freshmeat.org/, or http://www.php.org ? Hell, no!
- Robert Douglass
-----
My Drupal book: Building Online Communities with Drupal, phpBB and WordPress
PS Don't forget...
... Drupal.com was on sale for something like $1,000. This guy believes he's going to recoup at least that much by owning it. I'll officially retract my opinion when drupal.com gets donated to the Drupal foundation.
- Robert Douglass
-----
My Drupal book: Building Online Communities with Drupal, phpBB and WordPress
If they are trying to do the
If they are trying to do the right thing, why do they register domains they have no affiliation with? It's nothing more than a domain squatter.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
Please do not call me that
I use a service that watches deleting domains. When an unused domain expires, it goes up on auction.
Recently, the domain phpnuke.com expired, and was obtained by this service, and then went to the highest bidder for $6,099.00. It was then quickly set up a link farm to profit from the traffic.
On the other hand, I pay my personal money to bid against these guys, or buy domains after they already have them, and then I GIVE them away for free. I do not have any revenue from any source, and I make all my information public.
Last year, I obtained the domain Manna.Org, which I did not have any ‘personal interest’ in, but now it will be used to promote renewable energy as part of the OpenDomain program?
How can you call ME a squatter?
Yes, the fact that others
Yes, the fact that others would obtain the same domain doesn't make it any better. The people registering the domain in the first place shouldn't have done so, if they have no affiliation. Putting it up for auction after expiry is IMNSHO bad business conduct. Buying it there isn't any better.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
This is not in my control
Dot Com domains are usually registered first. For example, WordPress.Com existed 2 years BEFORE the WordPress project was founded, so it was not 'squatted' in any sense.
I agree that deleting domains is bad, but I can not do anything about that.
What I CAN do is compete with the bad guys and then let Open groups use the domains. Thatis what OpenDomain is all about!
The money I pay for domains may help the real squatters, but at least in this case, we know that Drupal.Com can be used to help the community.
EaseXML.org
I have no idea how you've obtained EaseXML.org and EaseXML.com, but it's kind of weird that when XML Object was renamed to EaseXML you posted a comment with what seems to be close to squatting:
--
Tips for posting to the forums.
When your problem is solved, please post a follow-up to the thread you started.
I tried to contact these guys
I tried to give these domains to this group, but they did not want to use them. I have never used these in any way, and they will be deleted.
Question
Let me formulate my implicit question a little better:
XMLObject changed name in between nov & dec 2004. EaseXML.org was registerd on 13 dec 2004, one day after a post by it's author on the name change.
Yes, I'm sure you contacted the author. But why register the names in the first place?
--
Tips for posting to the forums.
When your problem is solved, please post a follow-up to the thread you started.
I do not know the timing
I do not know exectly what happened with this domain, but
sometimes when a new keyterm is introduced, it is a matter of hours before somebody grabs it. If a story happens in slashdot, it can be a matter of MINUTES.
I do not understand the problem. If the project admin wants to use it, they can at any time. Or would you rather that someone else bought it and put some pr0n up?
Sure it's better than porn
But ''better'' in the same way as "it's better to be hit by a car than by a lorry".
--
Tips for posting to the forums.
When your problem is solved, please post a follow-up to the thread you started.
Status
A trademark application is on its way. More about that later.
I talked to Ric from opendomain.org using e-mail and on the phone. I also e-mailed and phoned with the Director of the Jabber Foundation, whom OpenDomain bought a domain for 3 years ago. I also intend to talk to Matt Mullenweg from Wordpress.com.
Ric paid a lot of money for the drupal.com domain, so he told me. I second that not owning the domain makes me feel a little nervous but from what I've seen and heared, Ric has good intentions. He's trying to contribute in ways he can, and which he feels are important for the Drupal community. He addressed some of the reservations at http://opendomain.org/about-opendomain/; make sure to read those. Ric has transfered domains before but is somewhat reluctant do so given some past experiences.
Note that Ric purchased the domain before we started talking. This is all very new (quite a surprise actually) but I'll continue talking to Ric, to other OpenDomain "users" like Jabber and Wordpress, and as of now, to you guys ... I most certainly want to talk about this in Vancouver. We have to decide (i) if we agree with OpenDomain's terms and, if so, (ii) what we would use drupal.com for. If we can't agree on Ric's terms we probably won't take up OpenDomain's offer. It would be a pity because the .com could be valuable for the Drupal project. So let's talk about this, do our homework, and figure out what to do.
.com
In the spirit of things
.com / .community
How about bunging all the contributed stuff there - themes/modules/languagepacks/addons/fuzzy-pink-bunny-rabbits/etc.
common law
Drupal might already have trademark protection in the US under common law.
Regardless if its covered
Regardless if its covered under common law (which I doubt) keep in mind that one of the key elements of trademark protection in the US can require vigorous defense of said trademark. IANAL however I work in an office with one and we have discussed this may times as it (trademarks) are a major part of our business.
Trademarks can be tricky. They can also require work, and legal filings which are going to cost time and money. Is that what you really want drupal.org involved in?
As for drupal.com its really simple (and worthy of a patentlystupid posting IMHO). It was nice of the gentleman to try to help out and purchase the domain. As far as I can gather no one asked him to. Its a lot like buying a diamond ring for the girl down the street whom youve never been on a date with though. Youre expecting a lot, she(they) may not be willing to give. If she says no, are you wiling to lose the ring(domain)?
I'm sorry to see something like this become an issue. I am sorry that someone paid for what rightfully should belong to Dries and the Drupal community. If the person who purchased it was any kind of stand up person he would simply tranfer the domain to Dries and be done with it. Then if he showed his nature to be true in this manner perhaps acceptance would come. Maybe not. But its one of the very few ways he could show he truly believes in the word 'open' that he throws around so libereally. If he doesnt relinquish the domain freely then it becomes quite aparent that he will eventually either keep the domain and try to profit from it and Drupal's name or he wont. Although why you would purchase hold onto a domain that you arent going to use either directly or for extortio...errrr cybersquatting is beyond me.
Drupal.Com
I will address your concerns at http://opendomain.org/about-opendomain/ - so if you have any more concerns or issues, PLEASE let me know! I welcome all critiques, but please note that OpenDomain is an anti-squatter.
I have been in email contact with Dries, and will call him today. (If I can get the new skype to work)
Your opinon is welcome - please feel free to contact me if you have any other questions
Address them here as well
You might want to address them here as well:
http://drupal.org/node/43660
In the end, your motives will be judged by your behavior, as I'm sure you know. If you're out to help open source, and you do so, I and others will surely notice, even if it is non-conventional. My worries that I've expressed here an in the thread I linked to are one set of logical conclusions that anybody can (and other will) come to in this day and age with spam blogs and referrer spam and email spam, etc. The more clearly you address the issues (and your additions to your site help), the fewer skeptics you'll run into.
PS. How much did you pay for Drupal.com? Will you help transfer it to the Drupal Foundation once it gets formed?
- Robert Douglass
-----
My Drupal book: Building Online Communities with Drupal, phpBB and WordPress
Cross-posting
I did put new comments in the other thread.
I hear your worries all the time. Part of our terms are NO SPAM! (This includes search spam)
We paid A LOT! (More than what IBM contributed, and I am just some guy) We did recently transfer another very expensive domain, and we were screwed, so now we are cautious. I did talk to Dries about this.
My BS detector is pegged
You paid a lot for drupal.com but you're just out to help?
Somehow I just don't believe that.
I believe in Open Source
I am a Micoroft developer, so it was hard for me to believe that people would contribute their time without earning something for it.
I do not know PHP - so I work on .Net during the day, and use some of the money I earn to buy domains, which I let Open groups use for free.
Your problem seems to be
Your problem seems to be that Open Source or rather its developers does not believe in you. I am quite sure that the Drupal project as such does not have any need for the drupal.com domain. However, that does not mean that anybody else is entitled to its use or ownership. IOW: You shouldn't have bought the domain in the first place and that should have been very obvious to you.
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
--
Drupal services
My Drupal services
I disagree
Thank you for your opinion, but I disagree.
Also, several other people think it was a good idea, and Dries thanked me.
It is obvious to me that the domain existed before and can now be better used by the community.
In any case, this is 'water under the bridge'.
Can we find a more constructive way to find a way this good deed can best used.
I've started a new topic for this purpose
I've started a new topic for this purpose at:
http://drupal.org/node/46062
Copyright
All written work is copyrighted material, so, like articles or blog posts, the complete work is not bo be copied UNLESS the copyright holder so allows. You could, for example, require people who need your approval (quoting copyrighted material may be exempt form this requirement, so read up on copyright law in your country/jurisdition) to post a link on their site to the notice page that contains your quote. Just place a license to use the copyrighted work on your site.
If it is reusuable code, place it under a license suitable to your needs with the stipulations you want.
You are welcome to use a 'new' licensing scheme like the Creative Commons licenses or others, but there really is no need.
I, personally, like the statement you have posted:
I want to be able to put a stamp on the work that I do within a community that identifies it to the world—that says: Me and a buncha folks made this and we're proud of it. We did it not to make money but out of passion and love and because it's in our nature to create without secondary purposes in mind.
I don't think anyone would mind seeing that anywhere in the code....
Just my few cents...
Counsel