Re: Canonical’s IPRights Policy incompatible with Ubuntu licence policy

[Benjamin Kerensa]

Daniel,


On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:27 AM, Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On 04.05.2015 04:48, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> > Do we have any documentation of what and what not the CC can take on? Or
> > is the list made up on the fly?
> >
> > Why can the CC not take on this very important issue but expects somehow
> > a individual contributor can? To me that makes very little sense and
> > some explanation would be great.
>
> The Community Council oversees community processes and governance in
> general, but is in no position to give legal advise or go to court if
> necessary. That's simply not part of its mission statement and shouldn't
> be in my mind, as almost everybody on the CC is a volunteer in the
> community.
>
> It's very easy for others to demand what "the CC should be doing" when
> it's not your hours spent on the subject.
>

Does it take hours to send an email on behalf of the CC to Canonical Legal
and ask what is going on here? Does it take hours to write a short
statement like
Jonathan has asked? No it doesn't and this is a very important issue.

If anybody has a specific case where their project is hindered or
> blocked, bring it up with Canonical Legal. Mint brought up their case
> and it was resolved to their favour. It's in Ubuntu's interest in
> general, if the trademark can be defended if necessary and the rules are
> not too lax.
>

It shouldn't have to be a case where a project is hindered it should be on
the principle
that Ubuntu's values are being violated and even worse Canonical is
claiming rights
that it does not have.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-community-team/attachments/20150504/d5118e69/attachment-0001.html>