> If you change the icons to suit your business logos, or the forms to > suit your business needs, distributing those changes wouldn't serve to help > the community much, and generally don't fall under the redistribution clause > of the GPL. If someone used "Your" distributed icon in their product, it > would be a copyright (and likely trademark) violation against your company. > > The important thing is that if you change the _source_ to the > project, that those changes be available to the community, so they can > benefit from them. For example, if you added support for image maps within > Plucker, or parsing forms, or talking to a back-end database of content.. > _those_ changes are required to be set back into the community, per the > license.
I agree 100%. It is fundamental that the extra functionality be returned back to the project. With regard to trademarks, IIRC some projects (RedHat, Mozilla for some reason are the ones coming to mind) trademark their icon/logo and require a redistributed version to bear a different name and logo. IIRC that was the reason why a regular mozilla distribution doesn't have the red star/Shep Fairey T-Rex on the splash screen. Companies or governments I think can have a part of the project, as their need for solutions can help further some different functionality, as long as the terms of the GPL are held. Best wishes, Robert _______________________________________________ plucker-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-dev
