Re: New Apache license compatible with GPL? (Was: [Talin@ACM.org: Suggestions for wording...?])
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> But the The Apache Software License, Version 1.1, which can be found on
> <http://www.apache.org/LICENSE.txt> does NOT contain the word please.
Sorry, brain fart. It's what I get for trying to attack my backlogged
mail queue on a Sunday. You're right, it doesn't say please. Somehow,
though, I was lead to believe it wasn't an issue.
Does the GPL say anything about restrictions that other licenses may place
on the *naming* of combined works? The closest I can see is in section 6,
it says, "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients'
exercise of the rights granted herein." Since trademark isn't mentioned
(i.e., there is no "you are hereby granted a right to use the trademarks
associated with this program") then I have a feeling it's not covered.
To give an example, Linus owns the trademark on Linux, and while I'm not
sure he's actually pursued any action against an entity using it against
his wishes, I know he reserves the right to (by making sure people put
"Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds" at the bottom of
advertising & PR materials from the major Linux vendors).
Similarly, if Microsoft were to call its product MSApache, I'm sure we
would go after them.
Sorry about the compond sentences, it's late and I just saw Steve Reich,
so recursion is on my mind.