Gervase Markham wrote:
Francesco Poli wrote:
Hence, even if it's not a DFSG-freeness issue, I would suggest the
license drafter(s) to drop such a useless restriction.
It's been tried several times, and it's not happening. See the OFL list
for a recent explanation of the rationale. If it's
Terry Hancock wrote:
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 11:21:05 + MJ Ray wrote:
This means that forbidding derived works to carry the same name as the
original software is acceptable.
I believe that forbidding an unlimited and arbitrary list of Reserved
Font Names goes beyond
2 matches
Mail list logo
