On Fri, 2002-07-19 at 12:19, Branden Robinson wrote: > I do not know whether a court would uphold a copyright license > that attempted to enforce a "poor man's trademark" by conditionally > extending the license to a party contingent on that party's not using a > particular name or title in a particular way. I do believe, however, > that it is illegitimate for a copyright license to attempt to this, and > it is especially unacceptable for a "Free Software" license to do this.
Just so I'm clear on your opinion here: do you think it's illegitimate for a free software developer to receive a trademark, and then grant a license to the trademark in the copyright license under certain conditions? I'm thinking here of the CUPS license. This is essentially the GPL and LGPL, but with an additional clause that states that you may not use the (duly registered) CUPS trademark to describe derivative works except under a certain set of circumstances - circumstances that would be non-free if they were part of the copyright. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
