Re: RE : Re: RE : Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!
Scripsit Steve Langasek <email@example.com>
> Your analysis here is fatally flawed. First of all, requiring name changes
> for modified versions is *explicitly* free: it's codified in DFSG #4, and
> it's the only way that anyone could ever maintain a trademark in relation to
> Free Software.
Requiring a changed name is explicitly free. Requiring that the
original name cannot even be mentioned is not.
> Second, there is a huge difference between "hid[ing] the fact that
> your work is based on Debian" and avoiding confusing use of a
> trademark. If a use of the Debian name misleads people into
> thinking that a product is official and endorsed by Debian when it
> isn't, that's probably a sign that it's trademark infringement.
In this particular case there is nobody who is being mislead into
thinking that the disk is official and endorsed by Debian. At least I
have seen no reports of such people. In particular, the original
poster clearly shows in his very first post that he is aware that the
contents is not the official version.
Henning Makholm "The Board views the endemic use of PowerPoint
briefing slides instead of technical papers as an
illustration of the problematic methods of technical communicaion at NASA."