On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 12:25:10PM +0100, Ben Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 12:22 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 11:00:06AM +0100, Ben Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > <snip> > > > But if I rename before uploading the package to Debian, then that > > > provision is nullified. So I think the licence would then be free in so > > > far as it applied to the Debian package. Right? > > > > Note the wording makes it pretty much apply to everything, including the > > renamed version debian would redistribute, so, for example, derivative > > distributions should use yet another name... > > Ah, I see the problem, but I'm sure that's unintentional and could be > fixed. > > However, this is now moot as it seems others have persuaded him to use > separate copyright (LGPL, as before) and trademark licences.
To have a trademark license, ion3 should be a trademark in the first place. Is it ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
