Re: DFSG And Trademarks
On Fri, Jun 18, 1999 at 09:02:47AM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> I believe that several packages in main have a licence which forces
> any modified version to use another name. (TeX is a typical example.)
> This is not itself a violation of DFSG (it is even explicitely
> authorized in article 4), IMHO.
Is that why TeX for Debian is named "tetex"?
> In practice, if you fork and start a new CUPS, with the same code
> base, you will not want to use the same name, anyway.
I'm not really wanting to fork, per se; I'm more concerned with bug
fixes, adjustments for policy, security, etc. I would submit all my
hacks to Easy Software for inclusion in their package and assign
copyright, so there would be no question of their ability to use my
code.
The issue comes up if Easy Software considers some of our policy
requirements to be silly, or if they lag in incorporating bug or
security fixes. The question (which I'm hoping will be clarified
soon) is how much patching they would consider "configuration" and how
much would be considered a "derivative".
Reply to: