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

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

* Marco d'Itri (md@Linux.IT) wrote:
> On Jun 16, Eric Dorland <eric@debian.org> wrote:
> > I'm not trying to say it's non-free. It is free. What I'm trying to
> > determine is if we should use the marks within Debian. Let me try
> Good. This was not obvious at all by reading your precedent postings.

Ok, I did state that many times I thought, I was trying to get that
point across. 
> > another example. If, say, the Apache Foundation came to us and said,
> > "Sure the code is free, but that's our trademark you're using. It will
> > cost you $5000 a year to use that trademark in Debian". Now we could
> > easily afford this as a project, would we do it? I don't think we
> > would do it, even though we could because a strict interpretation of
> > the DFSG says trademarks don't matter.
> We would quickly tell them to FOAD, because it's a request that
> everybody would agree is unreasonable.

I'm glad we can at least see eye to eye on this one.

> > The point I'm trying to make is that clearly not all trademark terms
> > are reasonable.
> Sure. And the point most people here are trying to make is that they
> consider the MF demands reasonable and acceptable for Debian.

Indeed, the most vocal (and rational) contributors seem to be saying
these demands are reasonable. I'm still not convinced. 

> Now that we agreed that trademarks are not forbidden by the DFSG, if you
> really feel strongly about the need for users of a totally unrestricted
> firefox package, why don't you build it as well? Then users and custom
> distributions would be able to choose the one which better suits their
> needs.

Twice as much work? Thanks a bunch :-P

Eric Dorland <eric.dorland@mail.mcgill.ca>
ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com
1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C  2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6

Version: 3.12
GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ 
O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ 
G e h! r- y+ 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: