On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:56:45 +0100 Florian Weimer wrote:
They are not entirely unrelated. The DFSG explicitly mentions
mandatory renaming clauses in licenses, and deems them to be
DFSG-free.
Yes, but is requiring a global replacing of trademarked strings and
images acceptable?
I mean: it
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:28:56 +0100 Jacobo Tarrio wrote:
In short: yes, trademarks are orthogonal to copyright, ergo to
copyright license freeness.
Trademark are indeed orthogonal to copyright, but are they orthogonal to
freeness?
Note that I didn't mentioned copyright: DFSG are not limited
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:20:26 -0500 Nathanael Nerode wrote:
As long as we're discussing names
[...]
A name for the suite is hard.
What about the following ones?
tbird - Mail client derived from Mozilla Thunderbird
ffox - Web browser derived from Mozilla Firefox
sbird - ... derived from
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:44:33 + Andrew Suffield wrote:
It's not a major problem, because you can generate an unarguably
free work once by stripping it, and then everybody can modify the
stripped version instead.
That's true, but... ...what's
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:06:06PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:44:33 + Andrew Suffield wrote:
It's not a major problem, because you can generate an unarguably free
work once by stripping it, and then everybody can modify the stripped
version instead.
That's
On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 10:20:26PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
A name for the suite is hard.
Mozzarella.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description:
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:59:08AM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
Mind you, I don't think I'd necessarily have an issue with To use this
trademark, you must run a publically reviewable bug tracking system and
implement some form of version management (I might still, on a question
of practicality,
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:59:08AM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
Mind you, I don't think I'd necessarily have an issue with To use
this trademark, you must run a publically reviewable bug tracking
system and implement some form of version management (I might
still, on a
Package: disc-cover
Severity: important
There is possibly a license issue with this package, however, things are
a bit unclear.
It might be that part of the disc-cover package has insufficient
copyright statement by the authors. This is from the recollection of the
current maintainer. For
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 10:41:08AM -0500, Dave Harding wrote:
Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 01 Jan 2005 10:06:17 -0500
said:
So we have to therefore say beyond a certain level of change,
please remove our trademarks.
What purpose is served by Mozilla licensing
Dave Harding wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:59:08AM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
Mind you, I don't think I'd necessarily have an issue with To use
this trademark, you must run a publically reviewable bug tracking
system and implement some form of version management (I
Francesco Poli wrote:
Second option would require the Debian package maintainer to dig into
the source and play seek destroy with all cases in which the work is
referenced as Mozilla {thunderbird|firefox} or in which the official
logo is used...
This seems a bit more than requiring a name
Francesco Poli wrote:
tbird - Mail client derived from Mozilla Thunderbird
ffox - Web browser derived from Mozilla Firefox
sbird - ... derived from Mozilla Sunbird
moz - Web browser and mail suite derived from Mozilla
For what it's worth (and without making any judgement on the legal
weight
Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, I don't want to get too far into this conversation until
we've established whether you will need new names. Ideally, I want to
get a good understanding of the Debian position on trademarks in
general, and then go to Chris Beard and Mitchell
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 10:41:08AM -0500, Dave Harding wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:59:08AM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
Mind you, I don't think I'd necessarily have an issue with To use
this trademark, you must run a publically reviewable bug tracking
system
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:06:06PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:44:33 + Andrew Suffield wrote:
It's not a major problem, because you can generate an unarguably free
work once by stripping it, and then everybody can modify the stripped
version instead.
That's
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:25:25PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
Yes, but is requiring a global replacing of trademarked strings and
images acceptable?
I mean: it seems that Mozilla is requiring us
* either to comply with strict modification constraints
* or to replace every and each
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Package: disc-cover
Severity: important
There is possibly a license issue with this package, however, things are
a bit unclear.
It might be that part of the disc-cover package has insufficient
copyright statement by the authors. This is from the recollection
Gerv wrote:
I should point out that changing the name of Firefox and Thunderbird is
designed to be easy. Netscape does it with the suite to make Netscape, after
all. There's a central branding file or two where you change the name once
and it's picked up almost everywhere.
I'm not saying
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 11:19:33AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
I ran apt-get source disc-cover, and looked at the disc-cover script
in the package. It contains the standard GPL header:
That is from the current version and that is not the one that is the problem.
The version that is not yet
* Gervase Markham ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Alexander Sack wrote:
I suggest that we make a standard policy that works for all and not for
debian only. Otherwise, I feel that there are problems with dfsg, since
we cannot grant the same rights to our users, that you granted us. But,
here I
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 10:41:08AM -0500, Dave Harding wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:59:08AM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
Mind you, I don't think I'd necessarily have an issue with To use
this trademark, you must run a publically reviewable bug tracking
system
22 matches
Mail list logo
