The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
digital-goobers.vercel.app
The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
1–10 of 23 posts
Re: The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
#2Can a trademark holder can really stop anyone from modifying the mark? For instance, can Monsanto have a court stop someone from drawing a mutant-looking or withered version of the plant in their logo? (eg. https://grist.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/monsanto_wither...)
I don't see what's so unreasonable about the other points.
Re: The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
#3It’s very interesting how enforceable this trademark policy is. There’re trademark fair use, and it looks like they try to take away some part of it, through forbidding to use word Rust in other product names.
P.S. I am not a lawyer.
Re: The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
#4I don’t understand who is pushing for this. What’s the other side of the argument here? I may be incorrect but that feels more restrictive than any other programming language trademark policy? It would be like Go saying you’re not allowed to use the word “go” for your packages or create your own custom gopher, it’s such a common and accepted behavior that would feel ridiculously restrictive without good justification.
Re: The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
#5I don’t understand who is pushing for this. What’s the other side of the argument here? I may be incorrect but that feels more restrictive than any other programming language trademark policy? It would be like Go saying you’re not allowed to use the word “go” for your packages or create your own custom gopher, it’s such a common and accepted behavior that would feel ridiculously restrictive without good justification…
[deleted]
Re: The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
#6It’s very interesting how enforceable this trademark policy is. There’re trademark fair use, and it looks like they try to take away some part of it, through forbidding to use word Rust in other product names. P.S. I am not a lawyer.
I believe ”forbidden” only applies in area of programming languages and closely relative tech. Other than that, nope.
Re: The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
#7Can a trademark holder can really stop anyone from modifying the mark? For instance, can Monsanto have a court stop someone from drawing a mutant-looking or withered version of the plant in their logo? (eg. https://grist.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/monsanto_wither... ) I don't see what's so unreasonable about the other points.
[deleted]
Re: The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
#8Can a trademark holder can really stop anyone from modifying the mark? For instance, can Monsanto have a court stop someone from drawing a mutant-looking or withered version of the plant in their logo? (eg. https://grist.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/monsanto_wither... ) I don't see what's so unreasonable about the other points.
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 Wrong
#9I didn't realize, but this was basically unreadable on light mode before.
I did change it, though.
Re: The Rust Foundation's New Trademark Policy Draft Is Just Wrong
#10Can a trademark holder can really stop anyone from modifying the mark? For instance, can Monsanto have a court stop someone from drawing a mutant-looking or withered version of the plant in their logo? (eg. https://grist.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/monsanto_wither... ) I don't see what's so unreasonable about the other points.
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.
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.