Debian trademark [was: Debian GNU/w32, may ready to be started?]
On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 11:24:15PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Dec 2001, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 11:39:34PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Has anyone considered that there may also be legal problems with calling
> > this port 'Debian'? The Debian name is also a registered trademark,
> > recognize the advantages of a dpkg-based system for cygwin, and think
> > It may be appropriate to call for a GR to see whether Debian wants their
> > name to be used on this port.
> Well, if a full concensus is needed, I am already opposed to naming such a
> beast 'Debian', and I _will_ vote so (and I speak as both SPI and a Debian
> registered member, here), so don't bother.
Quoting from http://www.debian.org/News/1998/19980306a:
We allow all businesses to make reasonable use of the "Debian"
trademark. For example, if you make a CD of our Debian GNU/Linux
distribution, you can call that product "Debian". If you want to use
the name in some other way, you should ask us first.
So the name may not be used for _anything_ else, including this
hypothetical distribution, without some sort of approval. Possibly the
DPL has discretion to permit this, but I would not be surprised to see
an immediate GR to overturn such a decision.
> On the other hand, adding a w32/cygwin architecture (or whatever the _dpkg_
> guys want to call it) to dpkg is certainly NOT something anyone should
> oppose. Heck, one friend of mine ported the thing to AIX...
Nothing really to do with Debian, though.
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK