On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 11:54:08PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Branden Robinson <email@example.com> writes: > > > This license fails DFSG 3 and I would recommend to the author that he > > use the right tool for the job. If he wants trademark protection in the > > Wpoison logo, he should apply for it. Of course, any party that > > attempts to use laws other than copyright law to stop people from > > exercising their freedoms under the DFSG risks having their software > > dropped from Debian or moved to an archive server where such harassment > > is less feasible (for instance, U.S. crypto export regulations). > > I agree with Branden's analysis of the license provisions you posted, > but I think he a little overstates the issues with trademarks. In > general, trademarking a name of a piece of software (and restricting > the use of the name) has not been viewed to have anything to do with > whether the software is free. Hence why I said "any party that attempts to use laws other than copyright law to stop people from exercising their freedoms under the DFSG". Where did I assert that trademarking the name of a piece of software has anything to do with whether the software is free? -- G. Branden Robinson | It was a typical net.exercise -- a Debian GNU/Linux | screaming mob pounding on a greasy firstname.lastname@example.org | spot on the pavement, where used to http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | lie the carcass of a dead horse.
Description: PGP signature