Le dimanche 24 septembre 2006 à 23:32 +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : > > Jörg Schilling interprets this restriction as implied by trademark law > > in his country. > > I don't know whether his interpretation is a legally valid one (IANAL), > even though I've heard of cases where courts prevented the attempt to > use an exclusive right (copyright, trademark, ...) to block > interoperability. > Here, the restriction clearly forbids creating a derivative work that is > a drop-in replacement of the original, and thus interferes with > interoperability.
It does, but to what extent? AIUI wodim doesn't output this text and can be a drop-in replacement without a problem. > > Replacing the text by a 'this software cannot return > > "schily" because it would infringe on Jörg Schilling's trademark' > > notice - or no notice at all - would seem like a fine solution. > > Dropping this restriction from cdrkit would be a solution, if a > qualified lawyer confirms that we have the right to do so... I agree that we need some legal expertise to confirm that. Doesn't Debian or SPI have access to a lawyer for such cases? What is the appropriate procedure? > Anyway, let's not split hairs on the validity of Joerg Schilling's > claims: what we are talking about are clearly non-free restrictions (I > hope we can agree on that...) and must thus be solved somehow. I think the problem is more about GPL-compatibility than about DFSG-freeness. DFSG #4 already allows licenses forbidding re-use of the name or version number, and this isn't much a different case here. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
