Re: Proposal for license change
On 3 Apr 2014, at 18:06, [email protected] wrote:
> What about requiring a disclaimer like "This product is not endorsed nor contributed to by
> the PHP community"? (Please don't place any restriction on where this disclaimer may be
> placed, again for GPL compatibility.)
You speak as if GPL is the holy grail of licences. It’s not. So again, what’s your motivation in
asking for the PHP license to be closer to GPL? If you don’t actually have a reason, or at the
very least one you’re willing to share, what’s the point?
-Stuart
--
Stuart Dallas
3ft9 Ltd
http://3ft9.com/
>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 22:15, Stuart Dallas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3 Apr 2014, at 15:56, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>> And since nobody owns PHP and it is intended to be truly open and accessible to all,
does it even make sense to restrict use of the PHP name and require permission from an entity?
>>> In any case, may the US and UK trademark laws protect you. :)
>>
>> Why does this matter so much to you? Are you so desperate to call your product/project
"PHP Whatever" that you really can’t accept that the PHP licence is not an accident?
>>
>> As far as I know that clause exists to prevent any confusion over whether PHP (i.e. the
community) has had any input in to or has endorsed a particular product/project. It’s that simple.
And the only reason I can think of (which doesn’t in any way mean it’s the only reason that
exists) for why you care so much is that you want to imply such a connection.
>>
>> -Stuart
>>
>> --
>> Stuart Dallas
>> 3ft9 Ltd
>> http://3ft9.com/
>>
>>
>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 20:26, Rasmus Lerdorf <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04/02/2014 06:54 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Sharon Levy <[email protected]>
wrote:
>>>>>> Why does the PHP project continue to be without any kind of corporate
>>>>>> sponsorship in contrast to the opensource project Ubuntu which is backed by
>>>>>> Canonical? If the PHP project were to have a company supporting it,
>>>>>> wouldn't it be better protected? And, with a company backing it
wouldn't
>>>>>> the issue of acquiring a trademark then be feasible?
>>>>
>>>>> And if the company's shareholders decide they want PHP to go in a certain
>>>>> direction, what then? I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea. It just
>>>>> makes me really, really nervous. I'm not sure a trademark and funding
>>>>> would be worth giving-up our independence.
>>>>
>>>> Right, not being beholden to any sort of corporate entity is very much
>>>> on purpose. Nobody "owns" PHP and at the same time we all "own"
PHP.
>>>> That is the only way to keep PHP truly open and accessible to all, for
>>>> better or worse.
>>>> I also think you underestimate the hassle involved in getting (and
>>>> protecting) a Madrid-protocol international trademark for a 3-letter term.
>>>>
>>>> -Rasmus
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>>>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>>
>>> --
>>> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
>>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
Thread (4 messages)