On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 22:17:27 +0100 Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks, I will forward the bug upstream.
If you mean the "getmail6" maintainer, he has explicitly expressed that he has the right to use the name of my project as the name of his fork. He has zero intention of changing the name, and continually ignores communication on the subject. I am asking Debian to step in and fix this, since *you are distributing the fork under my project name* and causing me, and the getmail community of users, problems. The fact that Debian silently replaces "getmail" with "getmail6" on OS upgrade, leading to users experiencing bugs and seeking support from me because they don't even know what "getmail6" is, is an additional aggravating factor. Surely if I forked mutt and tried to get it into Debian as "mutt3" after the mutt maintainers explicitly requested that I change the name of my fork, Debian would rightly refuse? If I managed to submarine it into Debian and caused problems for the mutt community, Debian would fix the problem, remove the problematic package, and not re-accept it unless it was renamed? Renaming the fork is the ethical thing to do, and Debian is supposed to be about doing the ethical thing, not "whatever we want as long as we might be able to get away with it in a court of law". > But incidentally, I was searching the trademark database and it seems > "getmail" is a trademark registered by "Blue Cube Solutions Limited" > in UK. > https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00003129080 > > Not sure if "getmail" now should be using the name "getmail" as its a > registered trademark of another company. :) getmail predates that registration by more than 17 years. I'm not sure if you're trying to be disingenuous or what. Charles -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Charles Cazabon <charl...@pyropus.ca> Software, consulting, and services available at http://pyropus.ca/ ------------------------------------------------------------------
