[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

DFSG-free relicensing of the Debian logo(s)

[ Cross-post and M-F-T: -doc, -www, -desktop. Please Cc:-me on replies ]

Background: of our logos http://www.debian.org/logos/ , the one "without
'Debian'" is released under Expat license, the one "with 'Debian'" under
a DFSG-non-free license.

I've been working with SFLC/SPI to solve the "non-free Debian logo"
issue. I've now got green light to relicense the logo "with 'Debian'"
under a dual LGPLv3+/CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Which is good!, as we'll
finally have a DFSG-free logo that we can include in the archive and, as
a consequence, use in official artwork, website, documentation, etc.
The actual relicensing shall be done by SPI (as copyright owner) and has
not happened yet. But it should happen during the next SPI board
meeting, scheduled for September 13th, 2012.

If you're working on Debian artworks or the like, feel free to start
using the official logo in them. Assuming that it will be DFSG-free RSN
is now a safe bet. You should just avoid claiming that it is *already*
free until my final announcement here (after September 13th).


We've also been advised not to relicense the "with 'Debian'" logo under
a so-called "liberal" license like the Expat license. This is no problem
for the "with 'Debian'" logo, as it was under a much stricter (and
non-free) license anyhow. But I think it'd be appropriate to have both
logos under the same license.

I'm therefore considering asking SPI to *also* relicense the "without
'Debian'" logo to LGPLv3+/CC-BY-SA 3.0.  I could use the input of
-doc/-www/-desktop people on this matter.

Strictly speaking, LGPL/CC-BY-SA is more restrictive than Expat. But I
wonder if any of that would be problematic for our use cases. To gather
some data, I've gone through some of the -doc material on the web, and
most of it seems to be under GPLv2+, so (assuming the logo is used there
at all), the change wouldn't induce any incompatibility. Same goes for
www.d.o material, given the recent relicensing.

Also, everyone who has obtained a copy of the logo while it was under
the previous license will be able to continue to use it under the old
license, and distribute it to others. Considering the very low
likelihood of Debian changing its logo, this change would have close to
no negative effect anyhow: people who really want to have an Expat
version of our logo will be able to find it on the Internet.

OTOH, the positive effect of relicensing both logos will be simpler
licensing terms for our logos as a whole and, as a consequence, a
simpler www.d.o/logos/ web page.  Hence my inclination to relicense both
logos. Before proceeding, though, I'd like to know if in your
(-www/-doc/-desktop) daily use cases you see problems with doing so.

Many thanks in advance for your help,
Stefano Zacchiroli  . . . . . . .  zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o
Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: