Raul Miller wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 03:11:02PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: >>When did I say I thought it acceptable that you would need to change >>every single occurance of the word "Mozilla" when making a modified >>version? :) I said "top-level name", and I meant exactly that. To the >>extent names have been incorporated into functional parts of the work, >>*which includes a requirement to change an image, as well as doing a >>global s/Mozilla/other/g*, I do not consider it Free to require them to >>be changed, and I do not believe it is covered under DFSG4. > > What does this have to do with trademarks?
This entire discussion concerns the interaction of trademarks with the DFSG. This particular argument was regarding what restrictions I believe to be acceptable under DFSG4 and what unacceptable; the exact mechanism used to enforce those restrictions is not really relevant. >>(Personally, this argument is further strengthening my opinion that >>DFSG4 has little redeeming value, and that we would be better served by > > I'll grant you that it's possible to rewrite the DFSG such that any > software which mentions any trademark would be "non-free". > > Perhaps, by extension, this could also extend to all software in any > countries which have trademark laws because the software doesn't grant > rights to the trademarks of that country. This is not at all what I meant, nor do I think that is a good idea. - Josh Triplett
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
