[OpenAFS] Funding the formation of an OpenAFS Foundation

Troy Benjegerdes hozer@hozed.org
Thu, 27 Sep 2012 08:33:38 -0500

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 08:12:25AM -0400, Derrick Brashear wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed.org> wrote:
> > Have the USENIX association lawyers been made aware they are accepting funds in a manner which may expose them to trademark litigation from IBM? Either this trademark IS an issue, and blocks creation of a foundation, and ANYONE that accepts funds for doing work on 'OpenAFS' is potentially liable, or it's not.
> You asserting that doesn't make it true.

Then what the hell *is* the deal with the AFS trademarks? Can I market a product as 'Compatible with OpenAFS'? If I submit code to Gerrit for an IPv6 implementation that afs3-std has not signed off on, is someone going to claim I'm violating IBM's trademarks and/or the copyrights on the .xg files?  

I would like to hear an opinion of the Usenix association lawyers, IBM's laywers, or Red Hat's lawers, as a public statement on this mailing list, rather than all the uninformed speculation all of us are doing about it.

> > Is there a statement to what ends a donation to the Usenix openafs fund would be used for?
> Any purpose the Elders believe will further the ends of OpenAFS. Given
> the low amount of money involved it has been things like
> - procuring a 64 bit intel machine for a Linux port when such things were rare
> - subsidizing (or guaranteeing against) cost overruns for AFS workshops

I think the Elders have done a wonderful job ensuring the AFS workshops continue.

Unfortunately, this appears to be all they are capable or willing to do, since there has been talk of a foundation for years, and the conclusion, as far as I can tell, was 'its too hard, with all the trademark/IBM license nonsense'.

What is the official documented process for me to apply to be an AFS Elder and try to get some of this crap done?