* Marco d'Itri ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Jun 15, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It's an important part in evaluating the balance between the priorities > > > of our users and free software... > > And where do we strike that balance in this case? I think gaining more > > freedom for our users is the best thing in the long run. Sure, there > > will be shorter term pain, but we need to take the long view. > I'm here to build the best free OS, not to collect the most liberal > trademarks. If a trademark license allows us to ship the software the > way we want and there are no practical problems in removing trademark > references if it were ever needed then I think it's obvious that we > would do a disservice to our users by removing from Debian such a widely > know trademark without a good reason.
Well the whole issue is I don't believe we're allowed to ship the software the way we want. We would be compromising our principles by doing so. > There are good reasons for a trademark license to be restrictive and I > believe that the MF made a good case about their one, so I do not think > that it's important for users to have the permission to use it however > they want. The code is still free no matter how it is branded so this > is not an issue of software freedom, at best this is a marketing issue. I never asked them to give users permission to use it however they want. But their current permissions are too restrictive. -- Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
