Re: I'll let the Freemasons know Debian is distributing their trademark

2005-01-12 Thread Daniel Goldsmith
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:53:32 -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > William Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 02:10:26PM -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > > > You've got the Freemason logo in there feature for feature! > > That's not "original

Re: mozilla thunderbird trademark restrictions / still dfsg free?

2005-01-13 Thread Daniel Goldsmith
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:42:05 -0800, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 08:44:00PM +0100, Claus Färber wrote: > > I know of other precedents that say otherwise. E.g. automobile modders > > in Europe have to remove the original trademarks. > > That is by far the mos

Re: Creative Commons license summary (version 4)

2005-04-11 Thread Daniel Goldsmith
On Apr 11, 2005 12:21 AM, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > P.P.S: Am I the only one that sees threads broken by Humberto's replies? > It seems that his MUA sometimes sets "In-Reply-To:" and "References:" > fields to the "Resent-Message-ID:" value of the message he's replying > to, rathe

Re: I'll let the Freemasons know Debian is distributing their trademark

2005-01-12 Thread Daniel Goldsmith
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:53:32 -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > William Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 02:10:26PM -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > > > You've got the Freemason logo in there feature for feature! > > That's not "original

Re: mozilla thunderbird trademark restrictions / still dfsg free?

2005-01-13 Thread Daniel Goldsmith
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:42:05 -0800, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 08:44:00PM +0100, Claus Färber wrote: > > I know of other precedents that say otherwise. E.g. automobile modders > > in Europe have to remove the original trademarks. > > That is by far the mos

Re: Why is choice of venue non-free ?

2005-02-03 Thread Daniel Goldsmith
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 06:16:06 -0800, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 01:50:16PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > I'm not convinced that the advantage to the copyright holder is small. > > If a large US corporation violates my copyright license, I'm likely to > >

Re: Are Debian logos still non-free?

2005-02-23 Thread Daniel Goldsmith
On 22 Feb 2005 15:07:32 GMT, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If www.debian.org.uk wants to sell debian, then fine - I only > dislike them because they're now selling SuSE and "Linux" > consultancy without making it clear they're not debian (at > http://www.debian.org.uk/b2b/linux-support/ )