And since nobody owns PHP and it is intended to be truly open and accessible to all, does it even make sense to restrict use of the PHP name and require permission from an entity? In any case, may the US and UK trademark laws protect you. :) > On Apr 3, 2014, at 20:26, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 04/02/2014 06:54 PM, Kris Craig wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Sharon Levy <slevy1@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Why does the PHP project continue to be without any kind of corporate >>> sponsorship in contrast to the opensource project Ubuntu which is backed by >>> Canonical? If the PHP project were to have a company supporting it, >>> wouldn't it be better protected? And, with a company backing it wouldn't >>> the issue of acquiring a trademark then be feasible? > >> And if the company's shareholders decide they want PHP to go in a certain >> direction, what then? I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea. It just >> makes me really, really nervous. I'm not sure a trademark and funding >> would be worth giving-up our independence. > > Right, not being beholden to any sort of corporate entity is very much > on purpose. Nobody "owns" PHP and at the same time we all "own" PHP. > That is the only way to keep PHP truly open and accessible to all, for > better or worse. > I also think you underestimate the hassle involved in getting (and > protecting) a Madrid-protocol international trademark for a 3-letter term. > > -Rasmus > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
