On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 20:52, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 02:50:28PM -0400, Richard Fontana wrote: > > "The name and trademarks of copyright holder(s) may NOT be used in > > advertising or publicity pertaining to the Software or any derivatives > > without specific, written prior permission." > > > > while the NTP counterpart says: > > > > "and that the name (TrademarkedName) not be used in advertising or > > publicity pertaining to distribution of the software without specific, > > written prior permission." > > I can definitely see a practical concern here. In the second case, > (TrademarkedName) is usually the organization — for example, the WordNet > variant says > > "The name of Princeton University or Princeton may not be used in > advertising or publicity pertaining to distribution of the software > and/or database." > > That's easy to follow. On the other hand, it's very common for us to use the > name of a piece of software in Fedora Linux release announcements. Like, > "This release now includes WordNet 3.0", or whatever. But, again the last clause in the OpenFlow license is exactly the same as in the W3C license, which is OSI-approved. So my understanding is that the fundamental part to assess here is the "under the copyrights" addendum compared to a standard MIT license. -- Iñaki Úcar _______________________________________________ legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
