9 ms·

> Neither the name “Markdown” nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior wri

> Neither the name “Markdown” nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/license http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/license

shabble 14y ago
Does this mean all the current "Markdown" implementations out there are in violation of this licence term[1]? How would one reasonably convey that their formatter is markdown-capable? It would seem to me that there's a significant difference between "Bloopdown - a Markdown compliant formatter for blah" and "Markdown v3.Ice-cream-pony"; the latter clearly trading off the name of the original, while the former is descriptive. I'm not sure where "$X Flavored Markdown" falls on that scale, although I'd be surprised if something like GitHub hadn't sought permission or clarified the naming provisions. [1] Having checked a couple of different projects, none of them mention having sought or received that permission, but I suppose they might have
nickmain 14y ago
The license means nothing unless you're copying Gruber's code. Gruber doesn't have a trademark on the name "Markdown".
- loup-vaillant 14y ago
  I don't know about the USA, but here in France, one can have a right to trademark even when it's not officially registered. The main requirement is to show that you have established a de facto brand. Nevertheless, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4719809 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4719809
loup-vaillant 14y ago
He won't enforce it. How about that elevator pitch: > Makeup is a standardized version of John Gruber's Markdown. It has a formal specification, a reference implementation, and an exhaustive test suite. It also handles edge cases in a more sensible way than the original Markdown. I think "Markdown" as a name can no longer be killed. The same holds for Markdown as a format. Alternate implementations will exist for a long time, and they will be referred to as "Markdown implementations", at least informally. And so will whatever Markdown based "standard". I probably crossed the line by suggesting "<qualifier> Markdown" as an official name. But as an informal name, it will be used, and John Gruber won't be able to do a thing about it. By the way, I can't fathom why he wouldn't want Markdown spin-offs to be called "Markdown" as well. That name is his legacy. A standard would make sure to preserve it. As for his Perl implementation, it belongs to the museum, to be glorified as pioneering. But for actual use, Perl is now obsolete.

shabble 14y ago

Does this mean all the current "Markdown" implementations out there are in violation of this licence term[1]? How would one reasonably convey that their formatter is markdown-capable? It would seem to me that there's a significant difference between "Bloopdown - a Markdown compliant formatter for blah" and "Markdown v3.Ice-cream-pony"; the latter clearly trading off the name of the original, while the former is descriptive. I'm not sure where "$X Flavored Markdown" falls on that scale, although I'd be surprised if something like GitHub hadn't sought permission or clarified the naming provisions. [1] Having checked a couple of different projects, none of them mention having sought or received that permission, but I suppose they might have

nickmain 14y ago

The license means nothing unless you're copying Gruber's code. Gruber doesn't have a trademark on the name "Markdown".

loup-vaillant 14y ago
I don't know about the USA, but here in France, one can have a right to trademark even when it's not officially registered. The main requirement is to show that you have established a de facto brand. Nevertheless, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4719809 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4719809

loup-vaillant 14y ago

He won't enforce it. How about that elevator pitch: > Makeup is a standardized version of John Gruber's Markdown. It has a formal specification, a reference implementation, and an exhaustive test suite. It also handles edge cases in a more sensible way than the original Markdown. I think "Markdown" as a name can no longer be killed. The same holds for Markdown as a format. Alternate implementations will exist for a long time, and they will be referred to as "Markdown implementations", at least informally. And so will whatever Markdown based "standard". I probably crossed the line by suggesting "<qualifier> Markdown" as an official name. But as an informal name, it will be used, and John Gruber won't be able to do a thing about it. By the way, I can't fathom why he wouldn't want Markdown spin-offs to be called "Markdown" as well. That name is his legacy. A standard would make sure to preserve it. As for his Perl implementation, it belongs to the museum, to be glorified as pioneering. But for actual use, Perl is now obsolete.