On 2003-10-06 15:46:01 +0100 Eric Sharkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
However, if you look at the logo as a component of Debian as a whole,
and consider derived works of the logo to be derived works of Debian,
Surely the logo is a work on its own, as well as part of the greater
"Debian" work?
and invoke the exception of clause 4 to allow Debian to require
derived
works to carry a diffent name (and by extension, logo), then it fits
even the letter of the DFSG.
This seems a large and dubious extension of reasoning to me.
The spirit of the clause 4 exception is [...]
Can you give a reference that supports your interpretation? I am not
convinced that trademarking in this way is really the spirit of the
fourth guideline.
I don't think it benefits anyone to allow use of the Debian logo
to refer to not-even-tangentially-Debian things.
I disagree. Furthermore, I don't think it benefits anyone to waste
scarce effort on enforcing the requirement that all derived works of
the Open Use Logo to only be used for Debian references. I don't
think that has been seriously enforced in the past and I think that we
should formalise the real position.
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
PM 8+9 Oct: visit me @ AFFS on .ORG stand, at www.linuxexpo.org.uk
