Re: Apple stealing "Lily"

[Devin Ulibarri]

Andrew Bernard:
> Lilypond is not a brand and not a trademark. 

So, no one has put in for a trademark for Lilypond?

> It's open source software, and
> it does not compete in a market. Dear me. Lilypond software has no
right or
> monopoly over the English word lily.

Software can be free/libre (open source) and still have trademark.

Obtaining a trademark for free software is not a bad idea. It protects
users from potential confusion (imagine if anyone could copy any
branding they wished--how would you know you were using a brand you
trust?). Proprietary software is unethical because it restricts its
users. However because trademark protects users and not proprietors I
would not consider it unethical.

GNOME, for example, takes actions to protect its trademarked logo and
name. Here are some examples:
unitarypatent.com/gnome-trademark-infringement/
https://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/1331233/gnome-project-seeks-donations-for-trademark-battle-with-groupon

Other info from there website:
https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Resources/LicensingAgreement
https://www.gnome.org/logo-and-trademarks/

...having trouble finding a published reason for the rationale, but what
I have read was convincing.

Well, I guess there is a "good, bad, and ugly" according to
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/apr/29/trademarks-good-bad-ugly

At any rate, just watch out, if Apple continually tries to advance into
imitating free/libre branding in an attempt to push it out of the market
completely, then that would be a problem for all of us.

Devin