On 10/04/2010 03:34 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote: > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Rahul Sundaram<metherid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 10/04/2010 06:53 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>>> So according to you any free software with a trademark is non-free >>>> software? Good luck getting anyone including FSF to agree with that >>>> interpretation. >>>> >>>> Rahul >>> I'm sure they will. Trademark restrictions violate one of the four >>> freedoms and if you want I can ask Richard Stallman directly if this >>> trademark rule makes software non-free. Actually I'll just go ahead >>> and do it just to prove a point. >> >> Sure. I have asked and know the answer but go ahead. >> >> Rahul > > The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0). > > The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it > do what you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a > precondition for this. > > The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2). > > And the freedom Trademark law prevents in Firefox's case: > > The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others > (freedom 3)[SIC]. By doing this you can give the whole community a > chance to benefit from your changes[SIC]. Access to the source code is > a precondition for this. Notice how the last clause misses "using the same name"? You are perfectly free to distribute modified versions as long as you don't call them Firefox. That's what the Iceweasel people decided to do. So all freedoms are intact. Regards, Dennis -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
