[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gNewSense-users] Trademarks In gNewSense and the status of the CDDL

From: Kevin Dean
Subject: Re: [gNewSense-users] Trademarks In gNewSense and the status of the CDDL License
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:05:14 -0500

> I can't rebrand it Internet Explorer, Safari or Opera either - does that
> fundamentally affect the freedom of BurningDog too?
> I say no - the name of the tool is not essential to its functionality, and
> so preventing me from using some names does not really restrict
> my freedom of what I can do with firefox's code.

I agree totally, if one considers the source to be the application
then the "branding" on it is irrelevant. That said, why do we use
BurningDog over Firefox? It is because we actually planned on
maintaining changes from the beginning and didn't want to bother with
the Mozilla approval? Would that be a basic thing to do for other
things that may need rebranding (so a patch doesn't require us to
change the depends and stuff on X number of packages) in the future?

> > Both Debian's DFSG and the Free Software Foundation approve the CDDL
> > as a Free Software license but gNewSense has not addressed this
> > license.
> In general, If both Debian and the FSF approve a license, I see no
> reason why we wouldn't too.


I believe it's VERY possible to close these cdrtools bugs then if I
can build a package that contains the newer (all CDDL) version of
cdrtools; as it is now there's arguably a GPL violation with the CDDL
build-tools and GPL source.

Should we build such a package as cdrtools (since it's unmodified) or
should we rebrand it (still unmodified) in the event that we ever need
to make a quick change?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]