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

Re: DomainKeys license(s)

Not quite contradicting what was written, but it isn't quite so simple...

Stephen Gran <sgran@debian.org> wrote:
> trademarks are a no-op.  The DFSG allows for name-change clauses (DFSG 4).
> This allows us to modify and redistribute without infringing trademarks
> if need be.  No freedom issue here.

The trademark-related freedom problems I've seen most often are uses of
a copyright licence to support a 'super-trademark' either by termination
clause, or simply including software which doesn't follow DFSG (logo
artwork and so on).  I think super-trademark terminations were one of
the inspirations for the suggested Dictator Test.

By the way, are there still a few countries not in the Berne Union?  Maybe
copyright isn't completely cross-jurisdiction, but it seems near enough.

> Patents on the other hand are completely jurisdiction dependant. [...]

Not completely (TRIPS, WTO, bilaterals, blah) but enough to be annoying.

> [...] If it is not under
> active enforcement, and is under a free license, there is no reason not
> to have it in main.

Sounds sensible to me.  Anyone knows case law well?  What might happen
if a submarine patent in main starts being actively enforced?  It looks
to me as if the usual opening move is to send a take-down notice:

Hope that explains,
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: