Re: Org Trademark [was: A formal grammar for Org]

Re: Org Trademark [was: A formal grammar for Org]

[Tim Cross]

Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:

> * Jakob Schöttl <jschoett@gmail.com> [2021-06-02 11:23]:
>> I haven't tried BeOrg myself, but it's proprietary and we have an open
>> source, platform-independent alternative with Organice. See also
>> https://github.com/200ok-ch/organice#beorg
>
> As "Org" started first, it would be better that author ask the company
> to stop using the trademark. Trademark need not be registered, but
> when registered even better.
>
> By asking the author to either stop using "Org" as it is trademark in
> commerce (software is commerce) maybe they could get incentive to make
> it free software too.
>
>

This has nothing to do with defining a formal grammar for org mode.
Please refrain from hijacking threads in this manner. If something in a
thread makes you think of another issue (such as trademarks) or some
other tangential point, please start a new thread with an appropriate
subject. In addition to being correct netiquette and respectful to the
existing conversation, it will also ensure the point you raise has an
appropriate subject title, making it easier for those who are interested
in your point to see it and ensuring the indexing and searching of the
archives can be done more efficiently/accurately.

IMO there is no trademark issue here. Neither Emacs or org-mode have any
trademark ownership over the term 'Org' or any word which has 'org' in
it, like beorg.

-- 
Tim Cross

Re: Org Trademark [was: A formal grammar for Org]

[Bastien]

Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com> writes:

> IMO there is no trademark issue here. Neither Emacs or org-mode have any
> trademark ownership over the term 'Org' or any word which has 'org' in
> it, like beorg.

Indeed, thanks for clarifying this Tim.

Otherwise, we could claim some ownership on a large part of the World
Wide Web, at least domains ending in ".org" :)

-- 
 Bastien