[TriLUG] [OT] Common Public Attribution License / Open Source Initiative

[Jeremy Portzer]

Phillip Rhodes wrote:
> Steve Litt wrote:
>> On Wednesday 15 August 2007 13:50, Magnus wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately they own the trademark to the term "Open Source".
>>>
>>> It would be interesting to see a more openly run group coin a related
>>> trademark with a narrower definition and operate more transparently.
>> When did that happen? Last I heard, they backed out of trademarking it because 
>> it was too difficult to trademark (probably because it's descriptive). I 
>> don't have time right now, but someone should look up on USPTO whether it's 
>> trademarked at all.
> 
> My understanding is that they don't have a *registered* trademark, but
> that that doesn't mean they don't still have a trademark.   I'm not
> even close to being an expert on trademark law, but apparently there's
> something akin to a "common law" trademark where you gain a trademark
> simply through use in commerce, even if you don't register with the
> USPTO.  As I understand it, the OSI claims that they have such a
> trademark on the term "Open Source" despite pulling their application
> to register it with the USPTO.

Sure, but trademarks are also very easily diluted, unless the owner 
takes steps to protect it.  I don't think OSI is doing that.  The term 
"open source" (lowercase) is pretty heavily used by all kinds of 
organizations to refer to all sorts of things, many of which are not 
relevant to the OSI and OSI-approved licenses.  So I think the chances 
of them enforcing that are pretty limited.  Obviously IANAL, but this 
seems pretty cut and dried.

--Jeremy