On Mon, Apr 12, 2004 at 11:51:19AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > I think you're right. We should not accept that someone use the Term > "Debian" and our logo for promoting his own services, especially as he > didn't provide any value to debian (at least as far as I could see). Uh, anyone can freely use the Debian swirl logo to refer to Debian. Whether they sell it, provide services for it, develop it, use it on their servers, or sell copies of Red Hat to replace it. They don't have to provide any value to Debian at all to use our free-use logo. Calling his stuff "debian-desktop" otoh, probably is confusing and misleading, especially if it's not related to the debian-desktop@l.d.o project. > Well, I don't know what the appropriate action is ...almost certainly it's to talk to them and make our concerns known -- noting that there's an existing "Debian Desktop" project for a start, eg. Worrying about our legal rights is the *last* step in resolving misunderstandings; open source is *specifically* about ensuring everyone gets to contribute in whatever way they can; it's not an excuse to let people play CEO or barrister on the cheap. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> Don't assume I speak for anyone but myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Protect Open Source in Australia from over-reaching changes to IP law http://www.petitiononline.com/auftaip/ & http://www.linux.org.au/fta/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature