On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:09:11 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote: > Francesco Poli wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:41:49 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote: > > > Why would you do that? > > > > Because there can be more than one logo with different meanings. > > As you know, the Debian Project has currently two logos[1]: > > I understand that. But I think it is sufficient if you uniquely > describe the logos involved. There is no need to talk about > endorsement. > > "The sign X, registered as a trademark under number $NUM in > $REGION,..." I don't know if Debian logos are actually *registered* marks. Possibly, they are just unregistered trademarks... Does anybody know for sure? Anyway, how do you propose to keep the current role distinction between the two logos? > > > > That can only be used against you. > > > > How so? > > When you describe what the mark covers, you also describe what > the mark does not cover. If three years later your mark has > expanded to cover new things, this license will limit you. That is to say: restrictions won't expand? It seems to be a feature, rather than a bug, from a Free Software perspective... Or am I misreading you? > > I'm just trying to ensure you don't run into problems later on. What kind of problems? License could become a little too permissive? License could become a little too restrictive? I'd rather avoid the latter, even at the cost of risking the former! -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/etch_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian etch installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpjQ152lexZU.pgp
Description: PGP signature