<![CDATA[Really really really sad to see @Mastodon double down on this policy.]]>RE: https://mstdn.thms.uk/@michael/116413353094001294

Really really really sad to see @Mastodon double down on this policy.

My own instance uses mstdn as a sub domain (and pre-dates the official trademark policy).

As it's impossible to change the domain of an instance I cannot even change it.

And I think it's really really really poor form by Mastodon to prevent this extremely common pattern of using a sub domain that identifies the software being deployed.

Really disappointed!

]]>https://caint.ie/topic/a6d0359e-1179-4bdd-ab28-48d8a55e9fdb/really-really-really-sad-to-see-@mastodon-double-down-on-this-policy.RSS for NodeFri, 17 Apr 2026 07:04:15 GMTThu, 16 Apr 2026 08:11:10 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Really really really sad to see @Mastodon double down on this policy. on Thu, 16 Apr 2026 21:52:03 GMT]]>@michael @Mastodon My subdomain is literally "mastodon.tails.ch" because I'm *literally running Mastodon*. That's like saying I can't make "irc.tails.ch" because I have a fucking IRC server.

How unadulteratedly stupid.

]]>https://caint.ie/post/https://mastodon.tails.ch/users/shanie/statuses/116416598744759686https://caint.ie/post/https://mastodon.tails.ch/users/shanie/statuses/116416598744759686Thu, 16 Apr 2026 21:52:03 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Really really really sad to see @Mastodon double down on this policy. on Thu, 16 Apr 2026 19:39:46 GMT]]>@michael @Mastodon I'm kind of annoyed it doesn't check if WEB_DOMAIN is set and uses the trademark. My server has mastodon in the actual domain, but not in the WEB_DOMAIN (what shows up in my username).

I can understand wanting to enforce a trademark (Blender is also somewhat strict about trademark usage), but I feel like if they want to enforce it, they should make it easy to change domains as well.

]]>https://caint.ie/post/https://mastodon.standingpad.org/users/mahid/statuses/116416078585935134https://caint.ie/post/https://mastodon.standingpad.org/users/mahid/statuses/116416078585935134Thu, 16 Apr 2026 19:39:46 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Really really really sad to see @Mastodon double down on this policy. on Thu, 16 Apr 2026 11:59:11 GMT]]>@michael @Mastodon this... is strange, at least.

]]>https://caint.ie/post/https://selfdon.0x7c4.com/users/dooms/statuses/116414267490166302https://caint.ie/post/https://selfdon.0x7c4.com/users/dooms/statuses/116414267490166302Thu, 16 Apr 2026 11:59:11 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Really really really sad to see @Mastodon double down on this policy. on Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:44:28 GMT]]>@michael @Mastodon A bit unfortunate to apply enforcement of domain names many years later, and not survey how this affects existing usage. But there is an exemption if you get a written permission from Mastodon gGmbH.

]]>https://caint.ie/post/https://sorbit.no/users/trond/statuses/116413501813419259https://caint.ie/post/https://sorbit.no/users/trond/statuses/116413501813419259Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:44:28 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Really really really sad to see @Mastodon double down on this policy. on Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:29:08 GMT]]>@halfbyte @Mastodon Maybe, maybe not. I also am not a lawyer, so I cannot tell.

What I can tell though, is that other software that I deploy doesn't have policies that restrict me from using {software}.thms.uk for any of them. Mastodon is the only one.

Some may not have trademarks covering their name, sure. But many of them are very successful and the fact that I can deploy the software at {software}.thms.uk doesn't seem to harm them in any way!

]]>https://caint.ie/post/https://mstdn.thms.uk/users/michael/statuses/116413441509865163https://caint.ie/post/https://mstdn.thms.uk/users/michael/statuses/116413441509865163Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:29:08 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Really really really sad to see @Mastodon double down on this policy. on Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:24:32 GMT]]>@michael @Mastodon IANAL - I agree in principle with your sentiment, but this is how trademark laws work. If you don't defend them, at some point someone could try to nullify them on the grounds that you don't seem to care.

The alternative would be official licensing (I believe, again, IANAL) and that's maybe a bit too much work for such a small company.

I think we just have to accept that this is a place where the law and a general idea of "openness" simply collide in a particularly sad way.

]]>https://caint.ie/post/https://ruby.social/users/halfbyte/statuses/116413423452826885https://caint.ie/post/https://ruby.social/users/halfbyte/statuses/116413423452826885Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:24:32 GMT