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

Re: Towards a new LPPL draft

> I'm probably missing something obvious, but if the name "LaTeX" were
> trademarked and could only be used by systems that are created so as
> not to conflict with any package that could be obtained from CTAN, would
> that not actually provide better protection than is currently available?

we've been over this already. That (might be) fine for latex but it
offers no help at all to the vast majority of LPPL'ed software that isn't
called latex.

> All the third-party modules author has to do to in order to be able to 
> guarantee that their users will not be fooled by an incompatible package
> is then to get their package in to CTAN, and they can use any license
> they like (so long as it's acceptable to CTAN).

There is nothing in LPPL that requires ctan distrib. In particular your
solution would allow Debian to make arbitrary changes to every
third-party latex package with no licence constraints at all, so long as
they distributed the changes themselves rather than resubmit them to
ctan, perhaps that's your intention?


This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: