On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 09:52:33PM -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:56:21PM -0500, DePriest, Jason R. wrote: >>> For the Cygwin folks, it is really a good idea to have the preferred >>> usage of the logo documented in an easily accessible location. This >>> long, drawn out, emotional thread has shown that nobody really knows >>> how someone can legally use the logo. >> >> There is only one person here who works at Red Hat, they are not a >> lawyer and, the last I knew, had no way to gain definitive statements >> from Red Hat counsel. >> >> So, again, I think I'm consistent in noting that if anyone is planning >> to use the Cygwin logo or the Cygwin name or has questions about >> licensing then it is in their best interests to make sure that Red Hat >> officially agrees with the usage. If they can get a general assurance >> from Red Hat then we'll be more than happy to put it on the web site. I >> suspect that nobody would be willing to provide official carte blanche >> usage suitable for this type of purpose but IANetc. >> >> Hmm. Maybe something like that is what should go in the FAQ. > >Maybe it should but then again, since this is the first time I recall in >at least 12 years that this issue has come up on the list, I'm not sure it >qualifies as an FAQ. Maybe it could go under the contributor's guide or >the cygwin-license list description. Or maybe it needs it's own, more >visible category.
I was thinking of a general "I want to distribute Cygwin is it ok to XYZ?" section. Questions of that nature come up all of the time. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
