Re: The relation with gnomefiles.org

["Santiago Roza" <santiago roza thymbra com>]

On 7/14/06, Eugenia Loli-Queru <eloli hotmail com> wrote:
(original message included below)


> >you're also using a trademark without proper authorization!
>
> I don't know what "proper authorization" would be (you mean, in writing?).

i guess so, i'm not a lawyer thank god  :P


> but the Gnome Board HAS discussed the Gnomefiles situation last year. This
> is the email I received some time ago from a Gnome member ...

if the board is cool with the site, i guess you're ok.  but i just
meant you *could* potentially not be ok, if the board changed its
mind.

my point was: please realize you're using a trademark, so you can't
just post whatever you feel like in the name of that trademark,
without expecting any kind of control/authorization from the trademark
holder.

and please don't take this like a personal attack towards gnomefiles,
or anything like that: i really like the site and i use it
frequently... but you still have to understand that gnome is not your
trademark.


> ... So no, I am not
> willing to remove non-Free apps from the listing.

and i didn't ask you to (nor could or would i do such thing).  i just
said that it wasn't just your call but also the gnome foundation's, at
least if you wanted to keep using the gnome trademark.


> >> GnomeFiles.org is a GTK software repository.
> > why not calling it gtkfiles.org then??
>
> Marketing. Users don't generally know what GTK really is.

sounds like a good reason.  but please understand that your decision
of using a trademark puts your website (at least indirectly) under the
control of the gnome foundation.


greetings,


--
Santiago Roza
Proyecto Tiny ERP Argentina
Departamento I+D - Thymbra
santiago roza thymbra com



On 7/14/06, Eugenia Loli-Queru <eloli hotmail com> wrote:
> >you're also using a trademark without proper authorization!
>
> I don't know what "proper authorization" would be (you mean, in writing?),
> but the Gnome Board HAS discussed the Gnomefiles situation last year. This
> is the email I received some time ago from a Gnome member:
>
> "The GNOME board have now discussed that issue and come to the agree that
> you and gnomefiles.org are generally doing a very good job that we are happy
> with. GNOME choose the LGPL for multiple reasons, allowing non-gpl including
> non-free software is one of those. That said we do support free software
> above non-free and we feel that should in some way or form come through.
> [...] If you would also be willing to consider marking non-free software
> clearer as such, maybe boldfacing their license field or something that
> would also be appreciated. "
>
> And this has happened, I have complied with this request (all non-Free apps
> are now marked as such). I am not sure what more it can be done for this, it
> seems that the Board doesn't have a problem with Gnomefiles generally
> speaking especially after fixing the only standing issue. So no, I am not
> willing to remove non-Free apps from the listing. I prefer open source
> applications too (don't get me wrong), it's just that I also want the site
> to be a full, complete GTK+ app list.
>
> >> GnomeFiles.org is a GTK software repository.
> > why not calling it gtkfiles.org then??
>
> Marketing. Users don't generally know what GTK really is. It would fail if
> it was called gtkfiles and people couldn't even pronounce the name of the
> site. We like it or not, Gnome is the best ambassador for GTK. And that's
> why the site was named as such. In fact, MOST of our readers ARE Gnome
> users! And most of the applications listed there DO use the Gnome libraries!
> Gnome is in the HEART of the site, even if the site allows non-gnome apps
> too.
> However, I think that gtkfiles.org is also registered, but it's not pointing
> anywhere atm. I am not sure if the owner actually bought the domain name
> when I asked him to do so 2 years ago. But I _did_ ask him to do so. I am
> just not sure if it went anywhere.
>
> Sorry I can't reply to the list just yet, my emails somehow don't  go
> through and I have unsubscribed. I tried re-subscribing but the
> authorization hasn't arrive yet. Quim, if you would be so kind and forward
> my email to the list?
>
> thanks,
> Eugenia