Live data from Hacker News

Rust Foundation restricts usage of word “Rust” and logos

twitter.com

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: Rust Foundation restricts usage of word “Rust” and logos

#21
You need look at NOT the changes but the root cause of it to understand why this could be happening. Most of these wordings looks like a corporate stuff. And that is exactly what this looks like.

Rust is a Non-profit 501(c)(*6*) foundation and *NOT* 501(c)(3) which is what you probably expect when you hear or say the word _non-profit_. A 501(c)(6) non-profit is to look after the common interests of the members involved. It is non-profit. But the money pooled in are for the interests of it's members. Meaning Rust Foundation's corporate members.

I don't know the people who wrote it, but my guess is this is at least one of the reasons. I am honestly guessing some of the weird ones will be reverted and this is because of a misunderstanding because of the people involved (Probably some legal team?). Obviously, I could be wrong here.

---

A non-profit 501(c)(3) organisation on the other hand is for public charity, public interest and things like that. They are more likely to be community oriented than a (c)(6). Python foundation and Zig foundation are non-profit 501(c)(3). In operating systems, Linux Foundation (which controls Node.js and other projects) is a 501(c)(6) as well. While FreeBSD is a non-profit 501(c)(3).

Ideally we want projects which have a non-profit 501(c)(3) organisation to flourish cos they exists for the community first even if corporate companies are heavily involved.

- 501(c)(6) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)_organization#501(c)(6)

- 501(c)(3) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)(3)_organization

Re: Rust Foundation restricts usage of word “Rust” and logos

#22
post #11

I feel like a fool for learning - let alone advocating - Rust to this point. The "great resign" is merely one year ago and the foundation has learned nothing. It is reasonable for any organization to protect against misrepresentation, but this proposal is overshooting so far that I could not even take it serious at first. Some of my favorites: - They try to trademark the words "Rust" and "Cargo" which are common word…

Seems pretty evident to me that some people are trying to kill Rust using simple sabotage techniques.. The question is, why?

Re: Rust Foundation restricts usage of word “Rust” and logos

#26
post #3
post #2

Implies that project names like rust-bitcoin are not allowed, unless they are developed by Rust foundation. This is a very bad decision for Rust adoption, completely out of touch. Did they just retain a corporate lawyer?

I don't really see how it's bad. Just use bitcoin-rs. That's clear that it's Rust-based, but doesn't look like an official, sanctioned project.

[deleted]

Re: Rust Foundation restricts usage of word “Rust” and logos

#27
post #15
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really see how it's bad. Just use bitcoin-rs. That's clear that it's Rust-based, but doesn't look like an official, sanctioned project.

Yeah, right up to the point where they trademark "rs" since it's also widely associated with rust.

That's the thing, isn't it?.

Even IF they don't go forward with this...who's going to guarantee to a developer/maintainer/company who want to build stuff in/with/for "The crab language" that this isn't going to happen again?

Re: Rust Foundation restricts usage of word “Rust” and logos

#28
post #11

I feel like a fool for learning - let alone advocating - Rust to this point. The "great resign" is merely one year ago and the foundation has learned nothing. It is reasonable for any organization to protect against misrepresentation, but this proposal is overshooting so far that I could not even take it serious at first. Some of my favorites: - They try to trademark the words "Rust" and "Cargo" which are common word…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN