Don't Call It Standard Markdown

[stevekinney]

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.

[jgm]

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.

[stevekinney]

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?

[benbjohnson]

I'm all for a formal definition of Markdown but this definitely constitutes a "derivative work".

http://www.rosenlaw.com/lj19.htm

[imsky]

Poor Gruber, he must be getting "written permission" emails all the time:

• https://chrome.google.com/webstore/search-extensions/markdown
• https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=markdown
• https://fnd.io/#/us/search?mediaType=ios&term=markdown

[howardroark]

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 :)

[vyp]

@howardroark

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

[rmorabia]

Continuing on John's offense...

He took to @Markdown for the first time in 3+ years to tweet this:

“Standard Markdown” is neither.

[howardroark]

@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!

[rmorabia]

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.

[howardroark]

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.

[qsantos]

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.

[preaction]

@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.

[anaisbetts]

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.

[davecom]

"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.

[n1k0]

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

[davecom]

Sorry for jumping on a troll

You're right, you should be sorry - name calling and a philosopher quote add nothing to the discussion.

[CameronBanga]

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

[archagon]

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.)

[qsantos]

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.

[tjluoma]

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.

[cebe]

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.

[benbjohnson]

@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.

[homosaur]

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.

[qsantos]

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

[brunobord]

someone on IRC has suggested: Meltdown. That'd be great to keep the ".md" file extension.

[factormystic]

@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.

[PhilLehmann]

Meltdown works in regard to the file extension. And Google telling us:

Did you mean: Meltdown?

when searching for Markdown would be even greater ;-)

[wb-towa]

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.

[factormystic]

@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.

[pkamb]

Fixed by renaming to "Common Markdown"
http://blog.codinghorror.com/standard-markdown-is-now-common-markdown/

[stevekinney]

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.

[kofalt]

Well, maybe we can rename the project each week w/r/t estimated implementation popularity :)

[vyp]

@stevekinney Keywords here are "as of this writing".

[wb-towa]

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.

[rlidwka]

"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.

[stevekinney]

@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.

[rlidwka]

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.

[vyp]

Should be resolved now by the way: http://talk.standardmarkdown.com/t/standard-markdown-is-now-commonmark/434