On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, David Maxwell wrote:

> it would be nice of people who enjoy the use of the code to
> make an entry for our gallery pages, 

Is there a reason you or your company needs to write the entry?  I assume
the contents of a _user's_ manual are no kind of trade secret, since
they're given to users.  They aren't protected by anything more severe
than copyright/fair use, yes?  Do you make customers sign an NDA before
you give them a manual?

It looks to me like, regardless of whether individual companies choose to
make this public,
 1. we know who you are, and
 2. we know you use NetBSD

Even a simple list, ``The following people credit TNF for use of our code
in their embedded products,'' would be good marketing for us, and it
needn't be based on anything more than a public manual.  If companies
don't want to make any comment about how much or how little code they
found useful, good for them--we needn't either, and can just say, ``use
of our code.''

Add a message to the end of the page, ``Companies are required by the BSD
license to give credit to TNF in their user's manual when they use our
code.  If you see us credited in a product that's not listed here, we want
to know about it!'' This makes it very clear what our position on the
matter is, and helps diffuse the anger of companies who want to point the
finger at employees who ``tell'' rather than at the manager who accepted
the BSD license without considering its implications.

What do these companies think we are some kind of conspirators honor-bound
not to give away their ``secret?''  First of all, it's not a secret.
Second of all, we're not conspirators. I don't understand the conflict.

All I see is certain already-public information that is in our best
interests to spread, and your company's best interest to conceal. A
company can choose not to deliberately publicize the use of NetBSD code,
and maybe they can even get away saying ``no comment'' if you ask them
point blank, ``do you use NetBSD?'' but I do not see how they can decide
that the information is ``private.'' There is a difference between
unadvertised information and a protected secret. Kelloggs may not
_advertise_ that there is caffeine in Captain Crunchberries[1], but if a
law requires them to print it in the ingredients list on the side of the
box I don't see what's wrong with disseminating the information further.
It is within our rights and our interests to list the people we know are
using our code. so let's do it.

Certainly readers here know enough to break some of these little stories
without involving employees and angering managers?

It's my opinion that you should all speak up, but it would probably be a
good idea to wait until people get a chance to discuss the idea before
spilling the beans.

[1] i don't know that there is actually any caffeine in Crunchberries.

-- 
Miles Nordin / v:1-888-857-2723 fax:+1 530 579-8680
555 Bryant Street PMB 182 / Palo Alto, CA 94301-1700 / US