On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, David Neary wrote: > Let's say that it was a mistake, or that distributing the foot under the > GPL is incompatible with defending it as a trademark - what remedy do > you think we should consider?
Seems like that's what redhat does these days: releasing their product which is Free Software, but you cannot redistribute due to trademarks. Don't flame me for what I just said, it's here: http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2005/06/30/esr_interview.html behdad > Cheers, > Dave. > > Alan Cox wrote: > >>That's what it says. I believe that we are going to handle logo > >>modifications on a case-by-case basis. Please let us know if you want to > >>use a modified logo, and as long as it's a reasonable usage, there will > >>be no problem. > > > > > > The logo has repeatedly been supplied as part of official GNOME > > distribution products labelled as GPL and when this has been pointed out > > the board has neither replied nor taken action to correct or indicate > > this was a mistake. > > > > Alan > > > > > > > > --behdad http://behdad.org/ _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
