On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:33:26 + (UTC) Frank Küster wrote:
> Sam Hocevar zoy.org> writes:
>
> >FWIW, there are no plans to change the official logo licensing as
> >far
> > as I know. Unless someone comes up with a suggestion that complies
> > with trademark law, it will have to remain
Sam Hocevar zoy.org> writes:
>FWIW, there are no plans to change the official logo licensing as far
> as I know. Unless someone comes up with a suggestion that complies with
> trademark law, it will have to remain non-free if we want it to serve
> the purpose it was created for.
Does it serv
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 10:15:00AM +0100, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > To put it another way: whatever one thinks of the Debian logo policy,
> > > it seems harsh on OP to make him comply with a stricter interpretation
> > > of the DFSG than the Debian pr
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:15:00 +0100 Sam Hocevar wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > To put it another way: whatever one thinks of the Debian logo
> > > policy, it seems harsh on OP to make him comply with a stricter
> > > interpretation of the DFSG than the Debian project
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > To put it another way: whatever one thinks of the Debian logo policy,
> > it seems harsh on OP to make him comply with a stricter interpretation
> > of the DFSG than the Debian project currently applies to its own logo.
>
> The whole reason the lice
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 03:34:45PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> The whole reason the licensing of the Debian logos is being changed
> is because the previous licensing made them unsuitable for use
> within the main archive. This is generally acknowledged as a bug,
> but shipping the official Debi
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 10:28:55PM +, John Halton wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 10:12:53PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > Wait, wait! Debian's own policy is not satisfactory! At least, I
> > don't consider it to be satisfactory (or DFSG-free), and other
> > people seem to agree with me tha
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:28:55 + John Halton wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 10:12:53PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > Wait, wait! Debian's own policy is not satisfactory! At least, I
> > don't consider it to be satisfactory (or DFSG-free), and other
> > people seem to agree with me that it s
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:25:41 +0100 Sam Hocevar wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > I am Cc:ing the DPL, because I would love to hear whether there is
> > any progress on the Debian Logo licensing issue.
> > I am not aware of any recent development on this front: what's the
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 10:12:53PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> Wait, wait! Debian's own policy is not satisfactory! At least, I
> don't consider it to be satisfactory (or DFSG-free), and other
> people seem to agree with me that it should be changed.
I'm aware that the licensing position regard
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007, Francesco Poli wrote:
> I am Cc:ing the DPL, because I would love to hear whether there is any
> progress on the Debian Logo licensing issue.
> I am not aware of any recent development on this front: what's the
> current plan?
> Sam, this debian-legal thread starts here:
> ht
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:16:48 + John Halton wrote:
> On 10/12/2007, Alessandro De Zorzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > PHAMM USE LOGO LICENSE
> >
> > This logo or a modified version may be used by anyone to refer to
> > the Phamm project, but does not indicate endorsement by the project.
> >
>
On 10/12/2007, Alessandro De Zorzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PHAMM USE LOGO LICENSE
>
> This logo or a modified version may be used by anyone to refer to the Phamm
> project, but does not indicate endorsement by the project.
>
> Note: we would appreciate that you make the image a link to
> http:
Hello there, I am not subscriber of this list, please
reply to me in CC, thanks in advance!
ftpmaster reject my new package Phamm www.phamm.org
due Image license restriction:
[...Hi Maintainer,
rejected, this wont go into main, the image license forbids that.
You also, even if you want to go to
14 matches
Mail list logo
