On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 06:18:08AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 10:30:55PM -0700, Paul C. Bryan wrote: > > > >>Are there any other examples of restrictions placed on open-source licenses > >>that Debian has had to deal with in the past? When a package is resricted > >>by trademark usage, does Debian have a policy to effectively deal with it? > > > > There's no difference between trademark law and anything else, and > > nothing special about copyright law. We are interested in what you can > > do with the work, for *whatever* legal reasons. It is significant that > > the DFSG does not talk about copyrights. > > Agreed entirely; unfortunately, this logic does not seem to be applied > in the case of the discussions of the license for the Debian logo. See > the "Free Debian logos?" thread.
The Official Use logo is not, as far as I understand, intended to be DFSG-free at all, and is not intended to be used in main; I don't think this is considered a bug. The Open Use logo should be, but isn't; this is a bug, but I think it's an acknowledged one. I don't think many people are seriously advocating that the DFSG only applies to restrictions made under copyright law. -- Glenn Maynard
