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

Re: Bug#265352: grub: Debian splash images for Grub



Josh Triplett wrote:

> First of all, even if it is the case that we can't offer a DFSG-free
> license for the logo without allowing it to become "diluted", then that
> does not exempt it from being DFSG-free.  I believe the suggested
> licenses were very clearly non-DFSG-free.
> 
> Second, I'm not suggesting that we put no restrictions on the logo.  I
> would suggest that we require people who copy, modify, or distribute the
> logo to acknowledge the origin of the logo, and not misrepresent it as
> being written by them.

The point in a traditional common-law trademark is that we don't want
someone to go out and start "Debian Computing, Inc.", use the Debian
open-use logo, and proceed to run a competing organization.

A trademark license *has* to prohibit such things.  Prohibiting
misrepresenting the origin of the *logo* doesn't suffice.  We have to
require that the logo, and anything "confusingly similar", is not used to
identify things which aren't Debian.

We can (and should), however,
* allow it (and the word "Debian") to be used in any manner which identifies
Debian, the project or the distribution (including by "Debian-based"
distributions, Debian redistributors, Debian developers, Debian promoters,
Debian haters, Linux collages, etc.).  This is in contrast to normal
corporate trademark licenses.
* allow it to be used in any manner which isn't identifying anything
(abstract art, etc.)
* allow modified versions which are not "confusingly similar" to be used for
any purpose whatsoever

> We should probably also include a copyleft. Such 
> restrictions would be DFSG-free, and probably GPL-compatible for that
> matter.  I also believe such a restriction, if actually enforced, ought
> to be sufficient to maintain a trademark.  (IANAL, hence "ought to be".)
IANAL but I think it isn't from what I know about trademarks.  Trademarks
are very old-fashioned things.

> Third, if we want a logo with a restrictive license, there is always the
> Official Use logo.  (I dislike the idea that any of Debian's logos would
> be non-DFSG-free, however.)
> 
> - Josh Triplett

-- 
This space intentionally left blank.



Reply to: