Re: Bug#265352: grub: Debian splash images for Grub
- To: Josh Triplett <email@example.com>
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#265352: grub: Debian splash images for Grub
- From: Brian Thomas Sniffen <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 23:53:07 -0400
- Message-id: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <4161A434.email@example.com> (Josh Triplett's message of "Mon, 04 Oct 2004 12:27:48 -0700")
- References: <414DF049.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <4151B76A.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20040923080524.kBAj6Y.DnAB3Z@rano.org> <415314B0.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20040923192058.9amGYk.email@example.com> <415348EA.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <4154B2CD.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20040924202651.R28624@links.magenta.com> <4161A434.email@example.com>
Josh Triplett <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Raul Miller wrote:
>>>Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
>>>>But trademarks are names. That's all they are -- not necessarily in
>>>>roman characters or pronounceable, but names nonetheless.
>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 04:50:37PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>>>That's a huge leap, and I seriously doubt it was intended by the
>>>drafters of DFSG4. I would argue very strongly against that
>>>interpretation. A name is just that, a name: some text moniker that
>>>identifies a project. "GCC", "grub", "Linux", and "Apache" are all
>>>names. A logo is not a name.
>> You're changing the subject from what Brian was talking about: the set of
>> "trademarks" has only a small area of overlap with the set of "logos".
>> Sure, there are logos which don't identify anything, but those logos
>> aren't trademarks.
> And in this case, the subject is a logo which is in the intersection of
> the set of "logos" and the set of "trademarks".
> "trademark" does not inherently imply "name" in the DFSG4 sense,
> although most trademarks are of names; neither does "logo". A name is a
> name, not a logo, not a sound file, not a video clip, and not any other
> similar work.
A name does have an image and a sound, though. Its image might move.
If I say "this doesn't pass the tex regression tests, so I can't call
it TeX. I will call is Samuel, which is pronounced "Tech"" then I
haven't really changed the name.
> The sum total of what DFSG4 should permit a license to
> require is a change in the top-level non-functional string identifier
> for a work;
Absolutely not. Requiring that derivatives of firefox stop using both
the name 'firefox' and the image of a flaming fox is perfectly
reasonable and free.
> I would be hesitant to say that it can even require a global
> s/NAME/SOMETHINGELSE/, especially if that name is ever used in
> functional manner, such as libNAME.so.42 or NAME_functionname.
Sure, of course functional components aren't names, or aren't purely
names and so you can't freely require they be changed.
> If we are going to permit arbitrary pieces of a work (including both
> functional and non-functional components), such as imagery, to be
> construed as a "name", then we have a serious Freeness problem.
Nobody suggested functional components but you. I've only been
talking about those parts of the work which name it.
> * Use as the basis of any logo, for any organization.
Yes, that's intentional. It's Debian's logo.
> * Use on the cover of a book.
Fine if it's a book about Debian, otherwise we don't want it to happen
because it weakens our trademark rights.
> * Use on a website (even of a competing distribution).
> * Use as the basis for hiding a steganographic message.
Irrelevant -- it can be used, only if the overt message is a reference
> * Use for Debian-derived distributions (though it would not give them
> the right to claim endorsement or affiliation, nor would any of the
> other cases).
Fine, if used as a reference to their Debian-derivedness.
> * Many other uses, few of which fall in the category of "referring to
> Debian", and none of which fall into the category of "fraud".
> * Use as the basis for any other image, which can then be used for all
> the same purposes.
I'd love to see your proposed license which allows practical use on
the cover of a book or on the pages of a competing distribution.
Brian Sniffen email@example.com