Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. - Mark Twain.
----- Original Message ----- From: "MJ Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "selussos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <debian-legal@lists.debian.org> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 10:42 PM Subject: Re: Debian Legal summary of the X-Oz License > On 2004-03-02 23:48:35 +0000 selussos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Why does this clause attempt to use a copyright licence forbid basic > >> rights > >> granted in most trademark law? [...] > > > > This clause is also in the X.org license and is found throughout X. > > We chose to be specific because we are the _only_ copyright holder, > > which > > is not the case, as you will notice, for X.org. > > > > Thanks for letting me clear that one up. > > I'm sorry to write that I don't think you answered my question above > at all, but stated a case where the questionable term is in a > different copyright licence. > > However, I think the use is significantly different. The copyright > permissions granted by the X.org licence found at > http://www.x.org/Downloads_terms.html do not seem to be conditional on > that term. The permissions of the X-Oz licence are. > > Could you please look at the X.org and X-Oz licences again and notice > this difference? If you want to mimic the X.org licence, then will you > make that clause a notice in the footer instead, please? Copyright > licence conditions are the wrong way to police trademarks. That possibly could be your own _personal_ prejudice which is understandable but I think that U.S. Copyright is fairly well deployed throughout this world and is internationally recognized. Best Regards, Sue
