Re: rust non-free-compatible trademark

[lkcl <luke.leighton@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:01 PM David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:

> Luke: you appear to me to be the one who is telling people what patches
> they can and cannot apply, and it's pissing me off.

1) please don't you dare put words into my mouth that i did not state.
    first and only warning.
2) i'm sorry you're annoyed. Asperger's interactions with neuro-typical
    individuals who are not used to the same typically do not go well:
    this conversation has all the hallmarks i'm used to being subjected
    to (and, frankly, shouldn't have to put up with).
    as you can probably imagine in 25 years it's pretty tiresome
    for me to be constantly subjected to abuse based solely on
    misunderstandings that, with the tiniest bit of tolerance, could
    easily have been avoided.
  3) as you work for redhat, you should be able to speak to HR and
      request Diversity training for how to interact with people with
      Asperger's.  [or, at least, how to recognise them and not get
      pissed off by how they speak].  given that it was "neurodiversity month"
      only a few weeks ago you should be able to find references on linkedin.

> Are you a lawyer?  If so please consider volunteering your time to the
> GCC Steering Committee *privately*.  If not, it seems to me to be a
> terrible idea to try to get the developers to pontificate in public
> about alleged legal issues with the project, their implications, and
> supposed workarounds.

i'm a Libre Ethical Technology Specialist.  i expect a project such as
gcc to be held accountable publicly for its decisions and actions,
and to act responsibly.  this conversation will be watched by a hell
of a lot of people and if there are private conversations on this topic
being held behind closed doors then how the hell can anyone have
any confidence and trust in gcc?

i'm publicly and fully accountable in the FOSS projects that *i* manage,
including the full financial records, and given how massively high-profile
gcc is, i expect it to be held publicly accountable to a far greater degree.


> The gcc rust frontend is an ambitious one with lots of technical
> challenges, but which has the potential to make the GCC and Rust
> development communities stronger;

or, if done incorrectly, screw absolutely everyone who ever tries
to distribute gcc or attempt to contribute to it.

> this discussion seems to me to be a
> pointless attempt to pick a fight between the two.

wrong, sorry.  read again the parts where i recommend a workable
solution that is based on a past real-world case: the ADA Certification
Mark.  here is the link again:

    http://archive.adaic.com/pol-hist/policy/trademrk.txt

what you *might* be referring to is that i have absolutely no qualms
at all about calling out the Mozilla Foundation's Rust Trademark as,
frankly, "bloody stupid".  given their past handling of iceweasel this
should be no surprise to anyone familiar with that fiasco.

i have absolutely no problem with the Python Software Foundation
Trademark because the PSF Trademark does not attempt such a
kak-handed, heavy-handed and draconian imposition.

i mean, for god's sake, the attempt to hide the efforts to demand
that people contact them if they perform any kind of "unauthorised"
patches is hidden in a document entitled "Logo and Media Policy Guide".
this in no way should inspire confidence!

please understand: if they *actually* did a decent job and *actually*
listened by converting the Trademark to a proper Certification Mark
(just as ADA did in 1987), i would be the first person to very loudly
praise them for such an astoundingly forward-thinking strategic
move to protect the Rust Language from harm in a very natural
and logical way.

from me you will always get the blunt truth as i see it.  no gloves,
no sugar-coating.  no diplomacy, no lying by omission.  it's... not
popular, but serves an extremely valuable purpose: cuts through
a lot of crap on topics that people were either not aware of or
were deeply uncomfortable bringing up, often for years.

you might not feel comfortable *admitting* that (certainly not publicly)
but after some [considerable] time and calm and considered
investigation, and once your feathers have de-ruffled, you'll
appreciate what i've done.

l.