From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
Received: from vlsi1.gnat.com (vlsi1.gnat.com
 [IPv6:2620:20:4000:0:250:56ff:fe95:277b])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6FA0385781E
 for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:28:52 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org C6FA0385781E
Received: by vlsi1.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 3004)
 id D247E33CAC; Sun, 17 Jul 2022 14:28:51 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2022 14:28:51 EDT
To: mark@klomp.org
Subject: Re: rust non-free-compatible trademark
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, luke.leighton@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <20220717174101.GA4487@gnu.wildebeest.org>
References: <CAPweEDxwqufkAcaWmQa_0Pcm-KQ9cr+XfyqyeMXtcVg1Gt6YuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220717163100.GA1558@gnu.wildebeest.org>
 <CAPweEDwrk9+10p_Ob7MmY9STQpgidXzbVchdL5Uefs4dFDGmdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220717174101.GA4487@gnu.wildebeest.org>
Message-Id: <20220717182851.D247E33CAC@vlsi1.gnat.com>
From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3490.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
 KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE,
 TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc mailing list <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc>,
 <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc>,
 <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:28:53 -0000

> I think you are misinterpreting when you need a trademark license for
> usage a word mark in an implementation of a compiler for a programming
> language. Note that gcc used to come with a full implementation of the
> Java programming language, compiler, runtime and core library
> implementation (for which I was the GNU maintainer). None of that
> required a trademark license because the usage of the word java was
> just for compatibility with the java programming language. 

Was "Java" a trademark for both the language and compiler or just the
language?  What about "rust"?  That would seem to make a difference.

If the trademark is just for the language, then when you say you have
a "compiler for the XYZ language", you're refering to the trademarked
entity (the language) and you can always use a trademark to refer to
the trademark owner's product.

But if the trademark is also for the compiler and you have a different
compiler (even if it differs just by patches), you need the permission
of the trademark owner to call you compiler by the trademarked name.