Re: forwarded message from Jeff Licquia
* Jeff Licquia <licquia@debian.org> [020719 20:22]:
> > I do not know whether a court would uphold a copyright license
> > that attempted to enforce a "poor man's trademark" by conditionally
> > extending the license to a party contingent on that party's not using a
> > particular name or title in a particular way. I do believe, however,
> > that it is illegitimate for a copyright license to attempt to this, and
> > it is especially unacceptable for a "Free Software" license to do this.
>
> Just so I'm clear on your opinion here: do you think it's illegitimate
> for a free software developer to receive a trademark, and then grant a
> license to the trademark in the copyright license under certain
> conditions?
I'm not the person asked, but in my opinion this would be illegitimate.
(Though a special licence for the trademark with conditions may be fine
and quoted near the copyright licence, as long as this are two
licences)
> I'm thinking here of the CUPS license. This is essentially the GPL and
> LGPL, but with an additional clause that states that you may not use the
> (duly registered) CUPS trademark to describe derivative works except
> under a certain set of circumstances - circumstances that would be
> non-free if they were part of the copyright.
I think http://www.cups.org/new-license.html is acceptable, as it
clearly states, that it is GPL/LGPL than talked about additional
things beeing allowed(with additional restrictions when these things
are allowed) and then talks about the Trademark.
(Though they could have put the paragraph trademarks after the
paragraph Binary Distributions rights, as these are copyright-
thingies again)
Hochachtungsvoll,
Bernhard R. Link
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: