> > (b) ensure that the installation of Your non-source Modified Version
> > does not conflict in any way with an installation of the
> > Standard
> > Version, and include for each program installed by the Modified
> > Version clear documentation describing how it differs from the
> > Standard Version. In addition, your Modified Version must bear
> > a
> > name that is different from the Standard Version.
Two parts to this. The first seems ambiguous, the second seems incomplete.
First part is, "clear documentation describing how it differs". Does this mean
how to reproduce it in source, which would be good; or what features have been
added to make it a better perl, which would be bad. Perhaps a couple extra
words may clear that up.
Second part is, "In addition"... this seems to be in addition to the whole of
section 6, and not just to b). It needs to be moved out from under 6 if that is
its intention. It is also a bit ambiguous, since xperlx is still legal (at
least without the addition of the trademark). Maybe amplifying the verbage
might be in order, like, "substantially different, in that no part of the name
may contain, or resemble, the name of the standard version". Contain I think
we've covered. Resemble is covered elsewhere in the Mascot discussion where if
it looks anything like a camel, it's a trademark infringement whether it's a
camel or a horse or an alpalca or a pet chijuajua.
This would still allow people to do what they need to do, even ActiveState
("ActivePerl" would still be allowed here), as long as they played by the other
rules. Fair is fair. If this is extreme, consider that a trademark would have
the same effect.
