On Sat, 2010-09-25 at 09:46 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > It seems like the path of least resistance for all involved is simply to > package the software without giving top-line (as in, project name) > credit to MeeGo as the upstream. "OpenSuse Netbook", "Fedora Netbook", > "Debian Netbook", etc. The MeeGo project will of course be correctly > credited with copyright notices in the source code for those who > download that. >
So what about when we do a release statement to not just the openSUSE community, but the wider community? Most users won't download the source to see who actually gets the credit - if it isn't on the release announcement then they obviously weren't important enough. I like to give credit where it is due, and right or wrong the MeeGo project deserves a large amount of credit. > If the MeeGo project doesn't *want* credit from remixes, then why give > it? Do you think there's a particular brand value in having a remix > associated with MeeGo? So to ensure that I and anyone else don't get mauled by any legal hyenas, could we get a list of packages that would contravene the branding/trademark/whatever so that re-spinners like myself, Peter and other can take appropriate action and remove any contravening artwork? The only package that explicitly mentions anything about Trademark or has a restricted license is meego-icon-theme, but I have heard mention in passing that mutter-meego and all the meego-*-panel apps also contain artwork that may anger the hyenas. Regards, Andy -- Andrew Wafaa IRC: FunkyPenguin. GPG: 0x3A36312F openSUSE: Get It, Discover It, Create It at http://www.opensuse.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
