Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks
Bruce Perens <email@example.com> wrote:
> In this case, I believe you're confused about what the DFSG says about
> DFSG #4 very clearly states: /The license may require derived works to
> carry a different name or version number from the original software.
That's fine on the work's own name. What about included artwork
and other marks? Often, people are unhappy about compelled
removals and it seems a rather "last resort" escape route.
If it's possible to have a DFSG-friendly trademark licence
for non-names, that would be really good and help sort out the
infringement of the debian mark within debian without non-free
licensing by consequence.
MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/