Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Using MF's trademarks seems to require some sort of licence to > > be granted specifically to debian and not to its users. That > > seems not to follow DFSG 7 or 8, doesn't it? > I don't see why. We don't require that trademark licenses be granted to > our users in any case - us having an extra permission above and beyond > the freedoms we expect for our users doesn't seem to be a problem.
We're distributing some files which cannot be modified and distributed if MF considers the resulting work "confusingly similar". Are there many other packages afflicted by such agressive registered trademarks? The other one which I remember is Apache and I think their trademark was another source of tension once. I would agree with your view if one doesn't need an MF trademark license to modify and distribute any of the work from debian main. Is this similar to deciding whether we would delete invariant sections from GNU FDL'd works if it were possible and they were the only problem? -- MJR/slef