#[0]

#[0]

#[0]

#[0]

#[0]

#[0]

#[0]

#[0] This is false. Nobody threatened you, implicitly or otherwise, with trademark enforcement. The person in question spread harmful misinformation about the project.

#[0]

#[0]

#[0]

#[0]

#[0] That's a very far cry from what my message said. I must assume you haven't read the thread I linked. I was responding to someone claiming they felt like an unpaid SRE for our organisation because there weren't enough customization options built into the software. I pointed out that they run a commercial service on top of it, and benefit from the recognition and goodwill of our brand.

#[0] Which statement about copyright are you referring to?

#[0] I will have to maintain that Mastodon refers to the Mastodon software, or that part of the fediverse that is running on the Mastodon software, and cannot and should not be used as a synonym for the fediverse overall. But this isn't what the thread was about at all.

#[0] See thread: https://mastodon.social/@Gargron/110130251661383127

#[0] At no point was the removal of custom emojis in display names announced. It was brought up as a potential solution to the problem of phishing in the form of a question dependent on community response.

#[0] I was responding to a specific person who claimed that they were feeling, due to a lack of customization options in the software, like an unpaid SRE for Mastodon gGmbH, and I pointed out that we do not benefit from them while they do benefit from us.

#[0] To emphasize, and I really shouldn't have to explain this, doubly so because what I wrote was addressed to a specific person, but being able to modify Mastodon's source code is part of your fundamental rights, and nobody is going to sue you for it.

#[0] This is a crude, bad faith mischaracterization of events, with a screenshot deliberately disconnecting the message from what it was replying to, in the context of a longer conversation, and then doubly mischaracterizing what said message actually says.