Nathanael Nerode wrote: >>No, you stated it fine. A Free logo would be usable unmodified as the >>logo for another project or website. That would probably cause >>confusion with Debian, but it is a legitimate use for a Free logo. > > We have accepted must-change-name clauses (which are worse) in the past based > on the reasoning that causing confusion is not legitimate. > > The GPL's requirement that you prominently note your changes is for exactly > the same reason. > > The 'no-endorsement' clauses common in BSD-style licenses are for the same > reason. > > I believe that using the Debian logo or name unmodified as the logo or name > for another project, without any clarification, in order to cause confusion Hence the license I suggested, that required such clarification. > about endorsement by Debian, or about what is Debian, or about who funds > Debian, is not a legitimate purpose or use for a Free logo (or name!), and I > hope most people agree with me. The key point is that uses which are *not* > likely to cause such confusion must not be prohibited. Agreed. However, using the unmodified logo _with_ clarification that it was originally the Debian logo, and without making false statements about Debian (which as far as I know you can't do anyway whether or not you use the logo) should be permitted. - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature