Hacker News Reader

Who gives a crap about what they deem acceptable. That's definitely non-enforceable in cases like "ubuntusucks.com"

Well, the original problem wasn't ubuntusucks.com, but fixubuntu.com with the Ubuntu logo. One could make the argument that those two things combined without a clear disclaimer at the very least could be an issue.

I do think Canonical's approach was far too heavy-handed, but this case is nothing like ubuntusucks.com (on multiple levels =)).

I am of course not referring to this particular instance, but posing a counterexample to the overly broad language in their intellectual property policy.

I am talking about this instance where Joey Hess is suggesting Debian cannot use the trademark without risking trouble.

I don't happen to agree with Canonical's behaviour in this respect, or believe it's enforceable.

He isn't suggesting Debian can't use Canonical's trademark, he's future-proofing/drawing attention to Canonical's newest fall from grace.

meh, he's quite clearly drawing attention +by+ suggesting it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com