Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upDon't Call It Standard Markdown #19
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
jgm
Sep 4, 2014
Member
This implementation is not derived from "this software" (i.e. Markdown.pl).
On Sep 3, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Steve Kinney notifications@github.com wrote:
Y'all didn't create Markdown and don't particularly have the right to create a "standard" based on it against the wishes of the original author.
From the license:
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.
It seems like you did both. Please provide proof of your written permission or consider a new name.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
This implementation is not derived from "this software" (i.e. Markdown.pl).
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
stevekinney
Sep 4, 2014
I'm sorry, are you saying:
- Documentation is excluded from the license?
- Your project is in no way derived from the original software implementation?
- Either of the above give you right to the name?
stevekinney
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
I'm sorry, are you saying:
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
benbjohnson
Sep 4, 2014
I'm all for a formal definition of Markdown but this definitely constitutes a "derivative work".
benbjohnson
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
I'm all for a formal definition of Markdown but this definitely constitutes a "derivative work". |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
imsky
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
Poor Gruber, he must be getting "written permission" emails all the time: |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
howardroark
Sep 4, 2014
Markdown has become completely ubiquitous. It is now an integral part of how the internet is shaping itself. Also, Aaron Swartz helped define this technology. He stood for nothing but open standards and anything that helped to encourage progress.
With all due respect, I think this project and any others like it are entirely in good faith. I can't see the originator taking any offence whatsoever. Though now that you mention it; an effort to petition Gruber to make Markdown public domain could be in order! I have a funny feeling that some encouraging words could make it happen :)
howardroark
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
Markdown has become completely ubiquitous. It is now an integral part of how the internet is shaping itself. Also, Aaron Swartz helped define this technology. He stood for nothing but open standards and anything that helped to encourage progress. With all due respect, I think this project and any others like it are entirely in good faith. I can't see the originator taking any offence whatsoever. Though now that you mention it; an effort to petition Gruber to make Markdown public domain could be in order! I have a funny feeling that some encouraging words could make it happen :) |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
vyp
Sep 4, 2014
I can't see the originator taking any offence whatsoever.
I'm not necessarily arguing for changing the name and I would agree that this project is in good faith, but it does look like John Gruber has possibly taken offence at the name: https://twitter.com/gruber/status/507305771265454080
vyp
commented
Sep 4, 2014
I'm not necessarily arguing for changing the name and I would agree that this project is in good faith, but it does look like John Gruber has possibly taken offence at the name: https://twitter.com/gruber/status/507305771265454080 |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
rmorabia
commented
Sep 4, 2014
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
howardroark
Sep 4, 2014
@jumpwah Fair enough! It makes sense when it's laid out in those terms. I guess I just don't really think that way :P
I just felt that Markdown has become a pattern that benefits the internet no matter where it came from. Here is to hoping that we can lay down our egos and let progress happen. There truly is a Markdown community that needs to be considered in all of this.
@jgm Maybe a heart felt appeal to Gruber is in order!
howardroark
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
@jumpwah Fair enough! It makes sense when it's laid out in those terms. I guess I just don't really think that way :P I just felt that Markdown has become a pattern that benefits the internet no matter where it came from. Here is to hoping that we can lay down our egos and let progress happen. There truly is a Markdown community that needs to be considered in all of this. @jgm Maybe a heart felt appeal to Gruber is in order! |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
rmorabia
Sep 4, 2014
As much as the community is important, the work is still John Gruber's and Standard Markdown must legally abide by his license, and more importantly, his public distaste.
rmorabia
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
As much as the community is important, the work is still John Gruber's and Standard Markdown must legally abide by his license, and more importantly, his public distaste. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
howardroark
Sep 4, 2014
I mean, I really do see your point and that of the original author. Credit and copyright are still a huge part of today's economic and social constructs. It certainly is an interesting situation with some philosophical implications.
Perhaps there is an opportunity lurking behind this situation. My hope is that the greater good plays out and that we can secure a place for Markdown (or something of equivocal nature) in the history of the open standards of the internet.
Alas, I am just one man.
howardroark
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
I mean, I really do see your point and that of the original author. Credit and copyright are still a huge part of today's economic and social constructs. It certainly is an interesting situation with some philosophical implications. Perhaps there is an opportunity lurking behind this situation. My hope is that the greater good plays out and that we can secure a place for Markdown (or something of equivocal nature) in the history of the open standards of the internet. Alas, I am just one man. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
qsantos
Sep 4, 2014
Disclaimer: IANAL
The documentation and the software implementation are both protected by copyright as expressions of an idea. However, the invention that Markdown is can only be protected by a patent. Contrary to copyrights, patents are not automatic and are granted by the state, since they potentially are a severe restriction to new works.
The naming might be a problem though, since I think that, although you are not technically violating the license, a judge might understand that "Standard Markdown" can induce confusion on the ownership of Markdown.
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.
I think the best solution would be for both John Gruber and contributors to "Standard Markdown" to have a cool-headed conversation and reach an agreement. After wall, I think we all want Markdown to grow.
qsantos
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
Disclaimer: IANAL The documentation and the software implementation are both protected by copyright as expressions of an idea. However, the invention that Markdown is can only be protected by a patent. Contrary to copyrights, patents are not automatic and are granted by the state, since they potentially are a severe restriction to new works. The naming might be a problem though, since I think that, although you are not technically violating the license, a judge might understand that "Standard Markdown" can induce confusion on the ownership of Markdown.
I think the best solution would be for both John Gruber and contributors to "Standard Markdown" to have a cool-headed conversation and reach an agreement. After wall, I think we all want Markdown to grow. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
preaction
Sep 4, 2014
Contributor
@benbjohnson From your link:
The primary indication of whether a new program is a derivative work is whether the source code of the original program was used, modified, translated or otherwise changed in any way to create the new program. If not, then I would argue that there is not a derivative work.
|
@benbjohnson From your link:
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
paulcbetts
Sep 4, 2014
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.
Licenses don't apply to names or people, this license applies to software. You cannot apply licenses to names without a trademark, and you cannot apply licenses to concepts such as the idea of Markdown, without a patent.
None of these apply in this case. The copyright of Markdown.pl does not matter here, not a single line of the code has been incorporated here.
But, getting Formal™ about this stuff is silly, let's just all make something awesome together.
paulcbetts
commented
Sep 4, 2014
Licenses don't apply to names or people, this license applies to software. You cannot apply licenses to names without a trademark, and you cannot apply licenses to concepts such as the idea of Markdown, without a patent. None of these apply in this case. The copyright of Markdown.pl does not matter here, not a single line of the code has been incorporated here. But, getting Formal™ about this stuff is silly, let's just all make something awesome together. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
davecom
Sep 4, 2014
"But, getting Formal™ about this stuff is silly, let's just make something awesome together and stop worrying who owns it."
Ownership and original authorship matter in our society - to think otherwise is a philosophical debate apart from present realities. While it's unclear whether or not there are any legal implications, there are certainly karma implications when against the wishes of the original author, a group chooses as aggressive a title (a title directly in opposition to the original author's wishes) as this group did.
I applaud their effort but I think their naming decision was unnecessarily inflammatory. The created animosity will only serve to hinder adoption and create bad blood.
davecom
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
"But, getting Formal™ about this stuff is silly, let's just make something awesome together and stop worrying who owns it." Ownership and original authorship matter in our society - to think otherwise is a philosophical debate apart from present realities. While it's unclear whether or not there are any legal implications, there are certainly karma implications when against the wishes of the original author, a group chooses as aggressive a title (a title directly in opposition to the original author's wishes) as this group did. I applaud their effort but I think their naming decision was unnecessarily inflammatory. The created animosity will only serve to hinder adoption and create bad blood. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
n1k0
Sep 4, 2014
Sorry for jumping on a troll, but:
Ownership and original authorship matter in our society - to think otherwise is a philosophical debate apart from present realities
Makes me think of
It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.
— Jiddu Krishnamurti
n1k0
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
Sorry for jumping on a troll, but:
Makes me think of
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
davecom
Sep 4, 2014
Sorry for jumping on a troll
You're right, you should be sorry - name calling and a philosopher quote add nothing to the discussion.
davecom
commented
Sep 4, 2014
You're right, you should be sorry - name calling and a philosopher quote add nothing to the discussion. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
CameronBanga
Sep 4, 2014
Placed a post on project discussion page here, as that forum mentioned that discussions like this should be done there, and not on GitHub.
http://talk.standardmarkdown.com/t/project-name-appears-to-infringe-on-markdown-license-terms/337/3
CameronBanga
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
Placed a post on project discussion page here, as that forum mentioned that discussions like this should be done there, and not on GitHub. http://talk.standardmarkdown.com/t/project-name-appears-to-infringe-on-markdown-license-terms/337/3 |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
archagon
Sep 4, 2014
The name is the main objection many people (including Gruber) have with this project. The current name is clearly meant as a political maneuver. If this is really about creating a great, consistent flavor of Markdown and not wresting Markdown from its creators hands, the name should be changed. (And the potential legal issue would be resolved.)
archagon
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
The name is the main objection many people (including Gruber) have with this project. The current name is clearly meant as a political maneuver. If this is really about creating a great, consistent flavor of Markdown and not wresting Markdown from its creators hands, the name should be changed. (And the potential legal issue would be resolved.) |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
qsantos
Sep 4, 2014
clearly meant as a political maneuver
wresting Markdown from its creators hand
Considering the poor communication from John Gruber, I doubt it was what was intended.
qsantos
commented
Sep 4, 2014
Considering the poor communication from John Gruber, I doubt it was what was intended. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
tjluoma
Sep 4, 2014
No one objects to the goal of the project.
The name is objectionable.
Every other Markdown derivation (which is what "Standard" Markdown is) has managed to avoid the appearance of trying to co-opt the name.
That this project has not avoided that problem hardly seems like an accident.
@jgm — your reply to the first message in this thread is incredibly disingenuous, and you know it.
tjluoma
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
No one objects to the goal of the project. The name is objectionable. Every other Markdown derivation (which is what "Standard" Markdown is) has managed to avoid the appearance of trying to co-opt the name. That this project has not avoided that problem hardly seems like an accident. @jgm — your reply to the first message in this thread is incredibly disingenuous, and you know it. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
cebe
Sep 4, 2014
Contributor
The name is the main objection many people (including Gruber) have with this project.
Can you give a link to where he (John Gruber) said that? I am not aware of an official statement.
Can you give a link to where he (John Gruber) said that? I am not aware of an official statement. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
benbjohnson
Sep 4, 2014
@cebe This was from his Twitter account an hour ago:
https://twitter.com/gruber/status/507591799884357632
You can read his Twitter account over the last day and get more detail.
benbjohnson
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
@cebe This was from his Twitter account an hour ago: https://twitter.com/gruber/status/507591799884357632 You can read his Twitter account over the last day and get more detail. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
homosaur
Sep 4, 2014
Bottom line here is the project name is in the wrong both by letter and spirit. It should be called something unique and not something to jack Markdown's SEO, even if that was not what was intended. MultiMarkdown managed this, I'm sure you guys can figure it out.
homosaur
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
Bottom line here is the project name is in the wrong both by letter and spirit. It should be called something unique and not something to jack Markdown's SEO, even if that was not what was intended. MultiMarkdown managed this, I'm sure you guys can figure it out. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
qsantos
Sep 4, 2014
It should be called something unique and not something to jack Markdown's SEO
Well, Markdown refers to markups, so "Markleft" as in copyleft might make some kind of sense
qsantos
commented
Sep 4, 2014
Well, Markdown refers to markups, so "Markleft" as in copyleft might make some kind of sense |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
brunobord
Sep 4, 2014
someone on IRC has suggested: Meltdown. That'd be great to keep the ".md" file extension.
brunobord
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
someone on IRC has suggested: Meltdown. That'd be great to keep the ".md" file extension. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
factormystic
Sep 4, 2014
Contributor
@homosaur hopefully this project WILL jack markdown's seo, so that people generally aware of markdown seeking to add that functionality to their app no longer endure the long and underspecified pain of legacy implementations, and instead find and use the resources provided by this project.
|
@homosaur hopefully this project WILL jack markdown's seo, so that people generally aware of markdown seeking to add that functionality to their app no longer endure the long and underspecified pain of legacy implementations, and instead find and use the resources provided by this project. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
philrykoff
Sep 4, 2014
Meltdown works in regard to the file extension. And Google telling us:
Did you mean: Meltdown?
when searching for Markdown would be even greater ;-)
philrykoff
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
Meltdown works in regard to the file extension. And Google telling us:
when searching for Markdown would be even greater ;-) |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
wb-towa
Sep 4, 2014
The name isn't right and should be changed. Github itself refers to Gruber's Markdown as Standard markdown: https://help.github.com/articles/github-flavored-markdown
So yes, this is a scumbag move that any decent human being would rectify. Surely if it's not that big of a deal you can change it anyway. Github had the decency to at least call their version Github flavored Markdown. I can't see why something similar can't be done that does not imply this is the original and definitive version of Markdown.
wb-towa
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
The name isn't right and should be changed. Github itself refers to Gruber's Markdown as Standard markdown: https://help.github.com/articles/github-flavored-markdown So yes, this is a scumbag move that any decent human being would rectify. Surely if it's not that big of a deal you can change it anyway. Github had the decency to at least call their version Github flavored Markdown. I can't see why something similar can't be done that does not imply this is the original and definitive version of Markdown. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
factormystic
Sep 4, 2014
Contributor
@ToadWarrior I don't really view Github's selection of the eponymous "Github Flavored Markdown" as an act of "decency", as you put it, but rather a label to differentiate it from a slew of differing implementations (including Gruber's). Similarly, this project's name differentiates it from a slew of differing implementations (including Gruber's) but you've called the name "a scumbag move" and implied that @jgm and the rest of the crew aren't "decent human beings" because of the name, and that the name implies original authorship of Markdown. These are all absurd things to say, especially considering that the website repeatedly credits Gruber for Markdown.
However, you and I both interpret the name to imply that this is the definitive version of Markdown. I view that as a strong 'pro' for the name "standard markdown" (if somewhat aspirational). The lack of preceding unambiguous definitions, and several high profile supporters, and most importantly the presence of a strong spec means that with the name "standard markdown", the claim of being "definitive" is now basically a tautology.
|
@ToadWarrior I don't really view Github's selection of the eponymous "Github Flavored Markdown" as an act of "decency", as you put it, but rather a label to differentiate it from a slew of differing implementations (including Gruber's). Similarly, this project's name differentiates it from a slew of differing implementations (including Gruber's) but you've called the name "a scumbag move" and implied that @jgm and the rest of the crew aren't "decent human beings" because of the name, and that the name implies original authorship of Markdown. These are all absurd things to say, especially considering that the website repeatedly credits Gruber for Markdown. However, you and I both interpret the name to imply that this is the definitive version of Markdown. I view that as a strong 'pro' for the name "standard markdown" (if somewhat aspirational). The lack of preceding unambiguous definitions, and several high profile supporters, and most importantly the presence of a strong spec means that with the name "standard markdown", the claim of being "definitive" is now basically a tautology. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
pkamb
Sep 4, 2014
Fixed by renaming to "Common Markdown"
http://blog.codinghorror.com/standard-markdown-is-now-common-markdown/
pkamb
commented
Sep 4, 2014
|
Fixed by renaming to "Common Markdown" |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
stevekinney
Sep 5, 2014
The name was changed, but I'm not sure that constitutes the issue as "fixed." It's the same problem with the parameters adjusted slightly.
Additionally, Common Markdown is—as of this writing—the least commonly implemented flavor of Markdown.
stevekinney
commented
Sep 5, 2014
|
The name was changed, but I'm not sure that constitutes the issue as "fixed." It's the same problem with the parameters adjusted slightly. Additionally, Common Markdown is—as of this writing—the least commonly implemented flavor of Markdown. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
kofalt
Sep 5, 2014
Well, maybe we can rename the project each week w/r/t estimated implementation popularity :)
kofalt
commented
Sep 5, 2014
|
Well, maybe we can rename the project each week w/r/t estimated implementation popularity :) |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
vyp
commented
Sep 5, 2014
|
@stevekinney Keywords here are "as of this writing". |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
wb-towa
Sep 5, 2014
You are correct, @factormystic the word standard could technically be interpreted in more than one way but it's like Bill Clinton's argument over what the definition of is is.
What's most important is how most people would interpret the meaning. I suspect that's why their picking names which are unhelpful to newbies and deceptive. They will search and find standard, base or common markdown. All the names imply everyone should support the listed functionality but your app / site doesn't so you complain. Therefore pressure is put on developers to support a single fork of the original.
Open source isn't about taking away a project from its original author just because you don't like how he operates which is effectively what is going on here.
And standards will not help. As pointed out markdown is hugely popular so John did something right. It just means users have to worry if their app supports common markdown and if so which version.
No one else wants to turn markdown into a mess like XHTML 2.
wb-towa
commented
Sep 5, 2014
|
You are correct, @factormystic the word standard could technically be interpreted in more than one way but it's like Bill Clinton's argument over what the definition of is is. What's most important is how most people would interpret the meaning. I suspect that's why their picking names which are unhelpful to newbies and deceptive. They will search and find standard, base or common markdown. All the names imply everyone should support the listed functionality but your app / site doesn't so you complain. Therefore pressure is put on developers to support a single fork of the original. Open source isn't about taking away a project from its original author just because you don't like how he operates which is effectively what is going on here. And standards will not help. As pointed out markdown is hugely popular so John did something right. It just means users have to worry if their app supports common markdown and if so which version. No one else wants to turn markdown into a mess like XHTML 2. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
rlidwka
Sep 5, 2014
Contributor
"Standard markdown" will do fine. If I see it live on reddit, stackoverflow and github, I can say with confidence that it is de-facto standard one. No deception here.
Open source isn't about taking away a project from its original author just because you don't like how he operates
No, it's about forking a project from its original author because you don't like how they operate. That's different from taking away.
But it's irrelevant here, since no original code is incorporated here, and markdown isn't a trademark.
|
"Standard markdown" will do fine. If I see it live on reddit, stackoverflow and github, I can say with confidence that it is de-facto standard one. No deception here.
No, it's about forking a project from its original author because you don't like how they operate. That's different from taking away. But it's irrelevant here, since no original code is incorporated here, and markdown isn't a trademark. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
stevekinney
Sep 5, 2014
@rlidwka Yea, you're more than welcome to fork a project if you don't agree on the direction. The issue is the naming. There is plenty of precedence for forking a project and it's permissible under the BSD license. Taking the name with you is not.
- When Apple forked KHTML, they renamed it Webkit.
- When Google forked Webkit, they renamed it Blink.
- Hudson was forked and renamed Jenkins as a response to Oracle's perceived negligence.
- Sproutcore 2 was renamed Ember when it was forked.
- MySQL was forked and renamed MariaDB when there was some disagreement about Sun's plans for the former.
stevekinney
commented
Sep 5, 2014
|
@rlidwka Yea, you're more than welcome to fork a project if you don't agree on the direction. The issue is the naming. There is plenty of precedence for forking a project and it's permissible under the BSD license. Taking the name with you is not.
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
rlidwka
Sep 6, 2014
Contributor
Original name is "markdown". Name of this project is "standard markdown". That's different enough.
There are a lot of markdown dialects that use name "markdown", and it didn't create any issues before now.
|
Original name is "markdown". Name of this project is "standard markdown". That's different enough. There are a lot of markdown dialects that use name "markdown", and it didn't create any issues before now. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
vyp
Sep 6, 2014
Should be resolved now by the way: http://talk.standardmarkdown.com/t/standard-markdown-is-now-commonmark/434
vyp
commented
Sep 6, 2014
|
Should be resolved now by the way: http://talk.standardmarkdown.com/t/standard-markdown-is-now-commonmark/434 |
stevekinney commentedSep 4, 2014
Y'all didn't create Markdown and don't particularly have the right to create a "standard" based on it against the wishes of the original author.
From the license:
It seems like you did both. Please provide proof of your written permission or consider a new name.