• From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 13:20:29 -0800

Tim Bray wrote:
> 
>  ...  The real problem we'd like to solve is, we'd
> like to try to prevent anyone who makes incompatible changes from still
> claiming it to be "SAX" and using the org.xml.sax package name.  Right?
> 
> Is there anything in the way of licensing, trademark, or copyright
> machinery that would be helpful? -Tim

Certainly.  The question is then who pays the lawyers to enforce
those claims.  Classically it's the copyright/trademark owner,
since nobody else has legal standing.  Public domain items have
no such owner.

- Dave

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: SAX2: Which license?
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Fw: Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
• Next by Date: Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
• Previous by thread: Re: SAX2: Which license?
• Next by thread: Re: SAX2: Which license?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread