Hello world, [ We got asked how the Debian project (and especially us as delegates handling the archive) has handled trademarks in the past, and our opinion on how restrictive Trademark licenses can (or not) lead to DFSG freeness issues. This topic cooked up with the special example of the current GNOME trademark license, so we base our answer on that.]
We feel that it is infeasible for Debian to be in complete compliance with the current GNOME trademark license. In our strict reading of this license, the only way to be in full compliance would require us to perform actions such as renaming packages in the form of GNOME™-control-center. This extreme example would conflict directly with Debian policy on the use of non-ascii lowercase characters in package names as well as being technically inadvisable. Therefore, as long as we are using GNOME marks, we are likely to be in some way violating their current trademark license agreement. The safest thing for us to do would seem to be to terminate all use of the GNOME marks, and essentially rebranding the software, as was done in the case for firefox/iceweasel. This, however, would be a huge amount of work for Debian with very little real payoff. We should be able to avoid doing all this work, as it seems that the trademark owners want to work with us in order to find some agreeable compromise. We therefore think that the best way forward would be to make a best effort to correct any specific cases which they point out to us as problematic misuse of their marks. But we have to be careful not to end up with a Debian specific solution (due to DFSG #8). The case of the image which was created combining the GNOME foot and the Debian swirl seem unquestionably in violation of their trademark, especially when you realize that the creator of this image was using the foot in this case with the specific intention of referencing GNOME. Until we can come up with some agreement with the trademark owners about using such a mark, Debian should stop distributing similar material. As a general comment, we feel like this problem is an unfortunate one. This situation is one where we have people trying to limit user freedom via software which is in Debian, going against Debian's core tenets. We understand they are doing so to defend Free Software related marks, but that doesn't solve the underlying problem. It may also be the case that from Debian's point of view, the developer body as a whole needs to take a formal stand by means of a GR on the general issue of how to resolve the tension among DFSG principles and trademark licenses. This would clearly resolve this issue once and for all, especially given that this is the second major instance of a similar issue. We therefore ask the DPL to consider raising the issue with the project as a whole, most likely after any initial discussions with the GNOME foundation have concluded. -- bye, Joerg, for the FTP Team Trying is the first step towards failure. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
