<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Caryl Bigenho <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cbigenho@hotmail.com">cbigenho@hotmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div> Hi... I guess I've become the minority. I still believe that the name "Sugar On A Stick" should be allowed for all distributions of Sugar on a usb stick or even a live CD. </div></blockquote><div><br>Caryl, I think I'm in the minority with you. And I don't think that "letting anyone who wants to call their work 'Sugar on a Stick'" will get in the way with the practical marketing decisions around it. This doesn't strike me as a legal issue*, mainly a social and practical one. <br> <br>But there seems to be consensus in the rest of the community about making this a precise term, and I don't feel strongly about it.<br><br>SJ<br><br>* Recent surveys on the uses of copyright suggest technologists have a tendency to focus on legalism; in contrast to students and free culture groups, for instance. I would guess the same holds for uses of trademark.<br> <br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div>Sugar Labs can control and identify their special builds in a special way... "SoaS by SugarLabs" or whatever, but the term has already become so generic that trying to make it exclusive at this point seems to be a waste of time and energy.<br> <br>Caryl <br>(one who remembers and longs for the days when free, open source software really was free and open source...in the early 1980s).</div></blockquote><div><br>:-)<br></div></div>