This prompts an interesting question: Does the Official Debian logo
meet the DFSG test?
DFSG 8 says: License Must Not Be Specific to Debian
Yet the logo's license says:
Debian Official Use Logo License
Copyright (c) 1999 Software in the Public Interest
1. This logo may only be used if:
* the product it is used for is made using a documented procedure as published on www.debian.org (for example official CD-creation)
* official approval is given by Debian for its use in this purpose
2. May be used if an official part of debian (decided using the rules in I) is part of the complete product, if it is made clear that only this part is officially approved
3. We reserve the right to revoke a license for a product
Etienne
Andrea wrote:
Lots of graphics (and probably some audio material, too) come in a form that can be considered "source code" (because it's not the preferred form of doing modifications, e.g. a flattened image vs. a layered one).If it's the only form available, then suddenly it's the prefered form for modification. However, in cases like this, maintainers and upstream authors should really attempt to keep the prefered form for modification around. In cases where it hasn't been done, we should work with upstream authors to make sure it happens in the future.Sure. I feel more relaxed about artistic works which aren't programs. For example, a graphic image's prefered form for modification may not even be software; it may be a physical medium such as a 'grafiti wall'.
-- Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D. http://www.info.uqam.ca/~egagnon/ SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/ SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/