Dear Debian legal list, I'm a bit reluctant to bring this apparently old topic again, but it seems it has not been resolved, while it does affect a number of packages.
So, I'm currently packaging DaCHS, a publication framework for the Virtual Observatory, https://salsa.debian.org/debian-astro-team/gavodachs. The package tries to encourage publishers to be explicit about the licence the published data is made available under, and it therefore contains upstream the cc-0, cc-by, and cc-by-sa logos from creativecommons.org so that, in the metadata web pages, these things can be fetched from the server itself (rather than, say creativecommons.org). In an ftpmasters-triggered a review of the licences of the various things distributed with DaCHS, I noticed these didn't have an explicit licence. So, I started researching, and I found https://creativecommons.org/policies/#trademark, where it says CC’s trademarks are not licensed under a Creative Commons license Following the link under the statement, there is: You may download high resolution versions of the Creative Commons logos and use them in connection with your work or your website, provided you comply with our policies. -- which probably makes the particular use case (deliver them with a publishing toolkit) a violation of the terms in the first place. And, sure enough, that's farily certainly DFSG-nonfree, right? I'm not the first one to notice the issue; https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=829701 from 2016 has a discussion on this, too. A quick research with apt-file shows a few packages besides dachs and mediawiki that already seem to have CC logos in Debian (quick selection: blobwars-data, dokuwiki, texlive-latex-extra, texlive-latex-extra-doc, ubuntu-packaging-guide*). So... has there been any progress on this question since 2016? Is there any prior art on how to deal with this kind of trademark-associated artwork? Thanks, Markus PS: can I ask for being cc:-ed?
