Re: Bug#265352: grub: Debian splash images for Grub
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#265352: grub: Debian splash images for Grub
- From: Nathanael Nerode <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:42:32 -0400
- Message-id: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <414DF049.firstname.lastname@example.org> <E1C99zK-0007IZemail@example.com> <4151B05C.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20040922223309.GB3294@suffields.me.uk>
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 06:22:45PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> 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.
> I'm not appreciably convinced that prohibiting this is worth the cost.
Well, I haven't been convinced that prohibiting this is non-free or has a
significant cost. -- so there we are. :-P
Can we at least all agree that Debian should permit everything which *isn't*
like that, whether or not we agree on that particular point? Because at
the moment Debian prohibits lots of uses which aren't anything like that,
and I'd like some forward motion on permitting them.
This space intentionally left blank.