On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:28:43AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote: > No. For example, even with GPL, it's normal for people to insist that > their software is not being released for purposes of helping commit > crimes. For example, some software which rips CDs include EULAs that > prohibit the use for duplicating CDs except for personal "fair use" > type application. However, that's merely a statement of intent and not part of the license. For instance, a license that says: "you may not use this software for larceny" *IS*NOT* Free Software. But stating in the README file "The authors do not condone usage of this software for larceny" is totally different. In short, the Mozilla case is one where Trademark law clashes with popularity. The only problem here is that people want to say "this distribution fubar has the firefox browser". Just install Icecat and be done with "this distribution includes a browser which can be defined as Firefox without trademarks" (or some better legal text a lawyer can write) Rui -- P'tang! Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 40th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
