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

Re: New Ion3 licence

On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 12:25:10PM +0100, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 12:22 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 11:00:06AM +0100, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> <snip>
> > > But if I rename before uploading the package to Debian, then that
> > > provision is nullified.  So I think the licence would then be free in so
> > > far as it applied to the Debian package.  Right?
> > 
> > Note the wording makes it pretty much apply to everything, including the
> > renamed version debian would redistribute, so, for example, derivative
> > distributions should use yet another name...
> Ah, I see the problem, but I'm sure that's unintentional and could be
> fixed.
> However, this is now moot as it seems others have persuaded him to use
> separate copyright (LGPL, as before) and trademark licences.

To have a trademark license, ion3 should be a trademark in the first
place. Is it ?


Reply to: