Re: mozilla thunderbird trademark restrictions / still dfsg free?

[Brian Thomas Sniffen <bts@alum.mit.edu>]

claus@faerber.muc.de (Claus Färber) writes:

> Hallo,
>
> Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> schrieb/wrote:
>> Gervase Markham has claimed[1] that command names must also be
>> changed. That's well beyond DFSG#4, since it impacts compatibility.
>
> DFSG#4 was probably introduced to allow the distribution of LaTeX, whose  
> license explicitly requires a change of the file name (in order to  
> maintain compatibility, BTW).

This is incorrect on more points than I can conveniently enumerate.
To hit a few easy ones:

* TeX does not require file name changes.  It's just that there are
  trademarks on the symbols \TeX and TeX, and those licenses involve
  passing the gruelling TeX regression tests.

* LaTeX doesn't require file name changes either; we had a big
  discussion with the LaTeX Project about this, and they were
  ultimately very nice about making and keeping the LPPL DFSG-free.

* DFSG 4 doesn't permit licenses which require file name changes.  It
  does permit licenses which require changes in the name of the work.
  The name of the work is strictly a social entity.  A file name is
  functional.

-Brian

-- 
Brian Sniffen                                       bts@alum.mit.edu