On Wed, 07 Feb 2007, Bastian Venthur wrote: > I have a question. If I understand you correctly you want to put the > "official use" logo under the MIT license AND enforce it as an > unregistered trademark so that someone can only use it if "we" > (who?) authorize it. This sounds contradicting to me and how does > this meet the DFSG?
It doesn't really, which is why the official logo should not be in any packages.[1] [Plus, it'd have to be ripped out anyway by any derived works of Debian, so best not to have it there in the first place.] > A second more general question: why do we need a (semi) non-free > logo after all? Looks to me like we're currently not allowed to use > the "official use" logo in our own distribution, so *why* do we have > it? > > Does somebody actually use it for something? Business cards of Debian Developers? Worship? Rubbing? Don Armstrong 1: AFAIK, it's not. -- N: Why should I believe that?" B: Because it's a fact." N: Fact?" B: F, A, C, T... fact" N: So you're saying that I should believe it because it's true. That's your argument? B: It IS true. -- "Ploy" http://www.mediacampaign.org/multimedia/Ploy.MPG http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
