Arthur Machlas <[email protected]> writes: > But DFSG doesn't give you the image to do whatever you want with, it > only gives you the software and programs to 'do whatever you want > with'
An image, in digital form distributed in Debian, must be licensed under terms that meet the DFSG. There is no distinction between different types of work for this requirement. (It's not essential, but I find it simplest to consider that all information in digital form is “software”, regardless of the purpose or intended interpretation of the bits.) > Bah.. at this point I don't even care anymore. How anyone could want > to be a lawyer is beyond me. I have a headache after one hour of this > nonsense. Thanks for doing so, it covered a lot of useful ground. You're right that it's tricky. The goals of ensuring recipients's freedom and protecting the meaning of a trademark are partially incompatible, and a resolution is not obvious. > In any case, I at least understand a bit better why Debian can't use > Debian logos in its Debian distributions distributed by Debian on CD's > with a Debian logo. <insert Xzibit image here> I learned from your explanation of it, so I raise a glass to you sir. -- \ “To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you | `\ must also be well-mannered.” —Voltaire | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
