Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Follow up to the recent trademark incident

Expand Messages
  • Andrew Ramsay
    It would have been wise of the SA to cast their intent in terms other than heavy-handed, dictatorial, and threatening. /r A. Ramsay Ashburn VA ... From: Cory
    Message 1 of 13 , May 2 9:40 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      It would have been wise of the SA to cast their intent in terms other than heavy-handed, dictatorial, and threatening.
       
      /r
       
      A. Ramsay
      Ashburn VA
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Cory Foy
      Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 12:15 PM
      Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] [scrumdevelopment] Re: Follow up to the recent trademark incident

      Hi Ilja,

      --- In scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com, Ilja Preuß <iljapreuss@ ...> wrote:
      > I don't think that happens just by itself. And frankly, I don't see
      > any indication that someone at the SA is willing to take
      > responsibility for what happened, or that someone even thinks
      > something would better have been done differently, or should be done
      > differently in the future.
      >
      > Perhaps it is happening, but if it is, it seems to be happening behind
      > closed doors. Which doesn't help me gain confidence. In fact, it would
      > kind of show me that what seems to be the most important lesson to me,
      > hasn't been learned.

      Actually, if you look at my last post to the group, I said that Jim explicitly said to me on the phone that they had made a mistake, and that they were being an impediment instead of a help, and that they wanted to change that.

      I also said that Jim and I are meeting on Tuesday here in Tampa to map out a way to change how this works. And further, that I'd make sure that any thing we came up with I'd bring to the group first.

      I didn't want to get too much into Jim and my discussion until we had talked more face-to-face, but here's an interesting tidbit. There are places in the world where companies, yes, companies, are naming themselves "Scrum User Group" as part of their title, and then offering "coaching" and "development" services through that company - usually by people that have not been through the Scrum classes, and often recommending things other than Scrum ("You don't need daily stand-ups! Prince2 is everything you need!").

      So the broader question is how to we keep that from happening and diluting not only Scrum, but agile as well? And do it in a way which allows for the teeth to block things like that, but without getting in the way of the communities that are working hard to spread agile and Scrum to their communities?

      That's what I hope to talk to him about, and what I want to bring out. I admit that I was quite skeptical, but after talking with Jim and others, I think that we can find a way to make it work.

      Hope that helps,

      Cory

    • Ron Jeffries
      Hello, Andrew. On Saturday, May 2, 2009, at 12:40:07 PM, you ... Did you read the letter they sent? I did not see anything in it that was heavy-handed,
      Message 2 of 13 , May 2 10:10 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello, Andrew. On Saturday, May 2, 2009, at 12:40:07 PM, you
        wrote:

        > It would have been wise of the SA to cast their intent in terms
        > other than heavy-handed, dictatorial, and threatening.

        Did you read the letter they sent? I did not see anything in it that
        was heavy-handed, dictatorial, or threatening. I'd be very mildly
        interesting in what you saw that was.

        Ron Jeffries
        www.XProgramming.com
        www.xprogramming.com/blog
        I try to Zen through it and keep my voice very mellow and low.
        Inside I am screaming and have a machine gun.
        Yin and Yang I figure.
        -- Tom Jeffries
      • Paul Oldfield
        (responding to Howard) ... Sounds promising. It would be good if a genuine Scrum user group could say what they were, even if they don t want to affiliate with
        Message 3 of 13 , May 3 8:39 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          (responding to Howard)

          > ... We recognize that for some Scrum User Groups this
          > agreement will not work. I think within a week we will come up
          > with a better way of getting this done and a framework that
          > will better address all our needs...

          Sounds promising.

          It would be good if a genuine Scrum user group could say what
          they were, even if they don't want to affiliate with Scrum
          Alliance or use the Logo, or pay money for use of the term
          "Scrum User Group". Of course, where I live that's not a
          problem; being able to give a correct description takes
          precedence over any registration of marks, in law. You'd
          be able to register and control "Scrum UsrGroup" for
          example, but not "Scrum User Group". Any genuine Scrum User
          Group would have a very good case in law to be able to use that
          description of themselves, because that's what they are.
          You might register the mark, but you'd have less ability
          to control use of the words from which the mark is made up.

          If you could prove the people describing thamselves as a
          Scrum User Group aren't, then they'd be in a less safe position.

          Paul Oldfield
          Capgemini
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.