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

DFSG And Trademarks



(please cc: me, if you would)

I've been thinking about this for a while, and the more I think about
it, the more it puzzles me.  So I thought I'd get an expert opinion,
or at least a few inexpert but loudly affirmed ones... :-)

I'm in the process of packaging CUPS, or the Common UNIX Printing
System.  It's at www.cups.org.  Linux Today readers can read the two
editorials on "A Bright New Future For Printing On Linux" or some
such.

The code itself is GPL, so DFSG compliance isn't a problem.  However,
the vendors have trademarked the words "CUPS", "Common UNIX Printing
System", and possibly a few others I'm forgetting.  The license page
(http://www.cups.org/LICENSE.html) has this gem:

  "Also, since we have trademarked the Common UNIX Printing System,
  CUPS, and CUPS logo, you may not release a derivative product using
  those names without permission from Easy Software Products."

I asked for a clarification from them, and got a response that talked
about "configuration" of the source being permitted.  On one level,
that could mean that they're giving you permission to run
'./configure'; OTOH, I was talking about the possible need to change
CUPS to conform to Debian policy, which could get into some major
"configuration".  They have promised to clarify the license, but they
haven't so far.

Practically speaking, there isn't much need to modify the code base to
CUPS itself.  It has a modular design, and any GPLed drivers,
backends, etc. that anyone else writes could be packaged separately to
avoid legal namespace pollution.  The major needs would be for things
like bug fixes, policy adjustments, and the like.  As long as you
assign them copyright to your code, they seem like they'll incorporate
fundamental code changes; they also have what they called a "bazaar"
for changes and add-ons that weren't accepted into the main package
for whatever reason.

To avoid confusion in the ranks, I was planning to use a package name
of "cups" (or, as is possible, something like "libcups0",
"libcups-devel", "cups", and "cups-doc").  Is this wise?  If not, what 
should I do?  Is more clarification needed?


Reply to: