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

Re: About Logo License



On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:15:00 +0100 Sam Hocevar wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
> 
> > > To put it another way: whatever one thinks of the Debian logo
> > > policy, it seems harsh on OP to make him comply with a stricter
> > > interpretation of the DFSG than the Debian project currently
> > > applies to its own logo.
> > 
> > The whole reason the licensing of the Debian logos is being changed
> > is because the previous licensing made them unsuitable for use
> > within the main archive.  This is generally acknowledged as a bug,
> > but shipping the official Debian logo within main is *also* a bug
> > until the licensing is remedied.
> 
>    FWIW, there are no plans to change the official logo licensing as
> far as I know. Unless someone comes up with a suggestion that complies
> with trademark law, it will have to remain non-free if we want it to
> serve the purpose it was created for.

I assume you mean that the current plan is to change the license for the
Open Use Logo only (making it DFSG-free), while leaving the Official Use
Logo licensing unchanged (and thus non-free).

If this is the case, I wonder whether anyone (beyond debian-legal
regulars) has read the (already cited) discussion that starts here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/04/msg00071.html

Did the people involved in the current logo plan review it?

Moreover, that discussion stopped, waiting for input that has not yet
arrived: unanswered questions are included in this message (by me)
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/04/msg00154.html


-- 
 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: pgpPt0KKD7TZ0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: