[Ilugc] Re: fossconf logo - license
- From: srivasta@xxxxxxxxxx (Manoj Srivastava)
- Date: Sun Nov 25 12:16:17 2007
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 10:54:09 +0530, Kenneth Gonsalves
<lawgon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
On 25-Nov-07, at 10:36 AM, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
This makes the logo just as non-free as the Debian official logo (and
where have you ever seen the official logo being used?), which is a
pity.
it's freer than the official logo - allows modification - but not as
free as the open use logo. Could you suggest modifications of the
license above?
My gut says t go with the GPL -- I mean, trust people not to use
a logo which says "Fossconf chennai feb 2008" to refer to something
else, really. Or allow modification, but ask for a name change (don't
refer to fossconf in the derived work).
In lots of situations, less control works out OK. On the other
hand, if you treat people like criminals, they tend to behave like
that.
Is there any credible harm that a restrictive license is
shielding us from?
manoj
--
If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. W.E. Hickson
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@xxxxxxx> <
http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Other related posts: