Close, but not quite. My concern is an express copyright license that
allows very liberal use. So I am person who wants to modify the software,
add malware, and go ahead and plant a logo on it that is under a license
that says essentially I can use the logo any way I want. So my use of the
logo is licensed, my malware is licensed (because I can modify the software
anyway I want), I'm good. Ok, maybe you have trademark guidelines that say
I can't do that, but who cares? I have an express license to the logo and I
may never have seen the guidelines anyway (much less agreed to them), so
they aren't enforceable against me. Why aren't I home free? You can say
"ah, that copyright license says you can use the *design* but not the
*goodwill*." Good luck with that - will it work? Sometimes, yes. Always,
no. The moral of the story is don't put your logos under a FOSS (or CC)
license. All rights reserved on those suckers. Which is my original
quibble, the copyright license IS the right place to be putting the
restriction.
Pam
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 2:43 PM Tom Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I think the point of note here is that requiring the removal of
trademarks
in modification scenarios does not conflict with the open source license of
the Eclipse works. The hypothetical concern is that a trademarks guidelines
for use somehow create a situation where it is not possible to comply with
them and the open source software copyright license at the same time, and I
believe Pam is asserting that she did not think that was possible.
Tom
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 1:29 PM Florian Weimer <fw(a)deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
> * Pamela Chestek:
>
> > I am, as described - a sharey license on the logo in the code and
> > restrictions on the use in trademark guidelines.
>
> Isn't that quite common?
>
> For example, the trademark license published by the Eclipse Foundation
> attempts to use trademarks to prevent redistribution of modified
> sources without full-scale renaming of everything:
>
> | Unless otherwise agreed to in advance in writing (which may be in
> | email form) by Eclipse, the following restrictions apply:
> | […]
> | Nobody other than Eclipse open source projects may develop or
> | maintain software packages that use 'org.eclipse' in their namespace
>
> <
https://www.eclipse.org/legal/logo_guidelines.php>
>
> But your initial observation applies here as well—these additional
> restrictions are rather deeply buried on their web site.
>
>