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

Re: About Logo License



On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:16:48 +0000 John Halton wrote:

> On 10/12/2007, Alessandro De Zorzi <lota@klez.it> wrote:
> > PHAMM USE LOGO LICENSE
> >
> > This logo or a modified version may be used by anyone to refer to
> > the Phamm project, but does not indicate endorsement by the project.
> >
> > Note: we would appreciate that you make the image a link to
> > http://www.phamm.org/ if you use it on a web page.
> 
> That all seems fine - as you say, it is almost word-for-word identical
> with Debian's own policy.

Wait, wait!
Debian's own policy is not satisfactory!
At least, I don't consider it to be satisfactory (or DFSG-free), and
other people seem to agree with me that it should be changed.

Debian logos are currently in an unclear licensing status.
The clarification and fixing process was started fairly long ago and has
moved on for quite some time (in a disappointingly slow manner).
However, there seems to have been no progress, recently.

Please see the following threads, for the gory details:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/02/msg00013.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/04/msg00071.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/06/msg00206.html

> 
> > Permission has been given to use the official logo on clothing
> > (shirts, hats, mouse pads, etc) as long as they are made by a
> > Phamm developer and not sold for profit.
> 
> That is more of a problem, as it prevents certain commercial uses of
> the logo. The same principles apply as for the Creative Commons "No
> Commercial" licences, which are regarded as non-free.

I would say that this is a non-free clause, but the rest of the proposed
license has issues too, as discussed in the above-cited threads.

The usual disclaimers for me are: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP.


I am Cc:ing the DPL, because I would love to hear whether there is any
progress on the Debian Logo licensing issue.
I am not aware of any recent development on this front: what's the
current plan?
Sam, this debian-legal thread starts here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/12/msg00044.html
Please reply to debian-legal, while keeping Alessandro in Cc:.
Thanks.


-- 
 http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html
 Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpmUGqQyLuOT.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: