Hi everyone, The Git PLC (Project Leadership Committee) is responsible for handling the "Git" trademark and the Git logo with help from the Software Freedom Conservancy. And we would like at this point to report about how we have been handling it, and to open the conversation about this subject. We have a web page about our trademark policy on https://git-scm.com/about/trademark. There, we list our guidelines for others who would like to use our "Git" trademark. Unfortunately a number of people don't respect our guidelines and use the trademark without asking us first (sometimes in ways that we might not like). If we don't enforce our trademark, there is a risk of us losing any right to it. So far we have tried to enforce it, especially in cases where people want to register a name based on it. The issue we have with enforcing the Git trademark is that we don't have much resources to enforce it. And in general we want to avoid spending time and money enforcing our mark in all possible instances. Legal discussions, going to court, etc can be very time and money consuming, and we would prefer doing more productive things with our resources instead. So, as much as possible, we don't want to take legal action. For example, we would much prefer to respond to a disagreeable use of our mark by first contacting the party and asking politely for them to change their use. Usually this is sufficient to deter infringing uses of our mark. We would be Ok if necessary to publicly say that for example one company is using our trademark in a way we don't like. We think that the threat of us doing that (if the company doesn't agree to change the way they use it when we ask politely) is in most cases enough to deter people from using it. This way of handling issues has worked well so far. The reason we think it works well, is that people think about the "Git" name as very cool, and that's why they want to use it in their product or company names. If the Git project would say that it doesn't like the way this company is using the Git trademark, it would likely create some bad buzz about that company and would go completely against their goal of being perceived as cool. Now we cannot be sure that this will always be enough to enforce it in the future. We might have to go to court in some cases. Also we still spend some time on this, so another possibility would be to stop enforcing the trademark and the logo altogether. We also would like to thank the Conservancy and the layers they have hired for all the information, help, advice and guidance they have provided on this. Now we are open to your thoughts about this. Thanks, Christian for the Git PLC
