[OpenID board] Trademark problem?

[Dick Hardt]

On 2-Dec-08, at 4:18 PM, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) wrote:

> On 12/03/2008 01:51 AM, Dick Hardt:
>>
>> What price is that? Easy to judge from the sidelines ...
>
> The price of having information hidden and the community/foundation  
> members uninformed and excluded from the process. (Hint: I miss some  
> really lively discussion which make up typical open source/open  
> standards discussions on mailing lists. They are usually useful for  
> the decision makers and the processes in general, despite the noise.)

I suspect you think there is more traffic on board-private then there  
really is. At times, someone slips up and starts something on board- 
private that should be on public, and we try and remember and move it  
over. I have done that a couple of times.

Let's not confuse the open source and open standards discussions that  
happen around OpenID with the operational mechanics of the Foundation.

Note we are having this conversation out in the open -- and I think it  
is a good thing -- and I appreciate you taking the time to publicly  
voice your opinion.

>
>> If you think you can do a good job on the board, please nominate
>> yourself to the board!
>>
> Unfortunately I couldn't dedicate the time which I think a board  
> member would/should have to invest in order to be useful. Another  
> time perhaps. This however doesn't mean that I don't want to be  
> informed and part of the processes, otherwise the company I  
> represent wouldn't be a foundation member in first place.

So far we have not done a very good job of communicating what has  
happened at the board level -- some of that is because not much did  
happen. We are working on changing that.

Remember that we are all volunteers and our ED is out of commission.


>
>
> Now, in the context of the supposed trademark violation I want to  
> understand of which nature those violations are and what exactly is  
> going on. Otherwise it's some kind of spreading FUD, because from  
> what I heard so far, there will be "negotiations"...Shall I  
> understand that we can negotiate on the OpenID trademark? I don't  
> see the benefit from hiding this issue away, quite the opposite. If  
> the board can't present a clear stance on such issues and signal  
> clearly to the community and public in general how such violations  
> are handled and of which nature they are - and have the community  
> involved in this process - then (IMO) the board failed in its  
> leadership role.

The object in dealing with the trademark issue is to protect the  
OpenID brand. This is in the best interest of the community.

If the discussion about how to deal with it is public, then the other  
party can be fully aware of our strategy -- putting the Foundation at  
considerable disadvantage.

There is a committee working on a clear Trademark Policy for OpenID.  
We don't have that at this point. Agree it is important. If you have  
time to help out, let David Recordon know.

In summary, we are doing the best we can as volunteers. I believe that  
everyone active on the board has the best intentions. We will and are  
failing at a number of things. We are working to improve them. At the  
upcoming election you can vote for who you think will best serve the  
community.

-- Dick