Re: GUADEC report
On 2004-07-06 20:21:39 +0100 Matthew Garrett
<mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
[...] things like the desert island test are excessive.
Excessive in what way? Yes, it's an extra concept, but it's usually
easier to explain than "does not follow DFSG 1, 3, 5, 6 and/or 7, for
a significant number of debian users, in reasonably forseeable
circumstances". Do you think the tests should never appear in a
summary, because they are extreme test cases used to detect common
failings?
What do you mean by "solid legal argument"? Do we need to find a
lawyer to
check my reasoning?
Lawyers have told people that releasing images of their trademarks
under
a free license would potentially harm their trademarks. [...]
If asked a suitable question, I expect some lawyers to say that
talking in one's sleep will potentially harm one's trademarks because
you may utter a blanket licence, but that's just normal lawyerly
caution.
Seriously, I'd be interested to know more about the reasoning and try
to understand it, although I'm not qualified to dispute it. If this
advice is accurate, then trademarked images are not easy to include in
free software. If the registrant wants to produce free software, they
should reconsider how they are using their trademarks.
Us saying "That's not what the law says" is not going to carry a great
deal of weight here unless we have some sort of legal support. [...]
Of course. This is not as familiar territory as the newbies claiming
that fair rights in the US means they don't need to grant basic
copyright permissions. However, it seems difficult to question when
faced only with "our lawyer said X" and not knowing why. Maybe we
should show some examples of trademark terms we like? Maybe we could
even make the damn debian logo artwork into one?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing
"To be English is not to be baneful / To be standing by
the flag not feeling shameful / Racist or partial..."
(Morrissey)
Reply to: