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

Re: Debian UK

* Stephen Frost (sfrost@snowman.net) [050907 14:02]:
> * Sven Luther (sven.luther@wanadoo.fr) wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > The debian trademark policy says no businesses get to use
> > > the mark.  Why should this selling association, which ignores
> > > good practice, get a swift exception, while Ian Murdock's
> > > development association gets referred for negotiations?
> > 
> > Because, quite simply, they are not a business, at least in the sense that was
> > meant at the above.
> I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation...  When we claim to
> not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to
> say that I'd expect anything which does sell products or is commercial
> would be considered a business to us.

Well, I don't know how the british rules are, but at least here
(Germany) a non-commercial institution can do "business", as long as the
"business" helps in reaching the institution's goals. And selling Debian
T-Shirts falls into that aspect IMHO. ("Business" because it doesn't
really always fall within the business laws.)

> > I mean, take LinuxTag for example, there where guys there at the debian booth
> > selling t-shirts and stuff, don't know the detail, but nobody bashed them for
> > doing business in debian name, and i believe as long as the money is not given
> > out to share-holders, but is for debian (either as plain donation, or expensed
> > for debian related stuff, like stock renewal and the ocassional yearly party),
> > then everything is fine and you are just silly in claiming the contrary.

> Either Debian's going to be a commercial entity or it's not.

Debian is not a commercial entity just because it _also_ sells T-Shirts
and other stuff.


Reply to: