Re: Logo trademark license vs. copyright license
Steve Langasek <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 07:02:11PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Firstly, much of this thread seems to be taken up by people saying that the
> > project can't disallow things which we don't think reflect badly on debian
> > but other people generally do. Why is this different?
> Huh? Do I understand right that you're asking me to justify others'
> contributions to this thread?
No. I'm asking why this is any different. If we should protect our goodwill,
then my concern is justified.
> > Secondly, if any debian developers think sweatshop-sewn shirts of cotton
> > subsidised by one of the world's richest countries reflect well on the
> > project,
> The inverse of "reflects badly" is not "reflects well", it's "does not
> reflect badly".
If any debian developers think sweatshop-sewn shirts of subsidised cotton
does not reflect badly on the project, that's disappointing and contrary
to recent surveys in the news.
Now, any got a reply to the substance rather than the language? Why should
we protect goodwill in one narrow way while allowing it to slip away in
another more widespread way?
I believe gambling debian goodwill on our derivatives is less dangerous
than the current gambling of debian goodwill on unethical merchandise.
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct