Re: [Fsfe-uk] GPLv3 last days for comment, and other news links

[rob]

Quoting MJ Ray <address@hidden>:

> "Jon Grant" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On 11 Jun 2007 19:17:25 +0100, Ciaran O'Riordan <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > I think the reason GPLv3 isn't tackling trademarks is that they haven't
> > > become a big problem, and there aren't clear signs that they will.
> >
> > That's good then. It seemed possible trademarks could be used to exert
> > some "control".. [...]
> > Imagine if a toolkit vendor said all the "Zt" had to be removed, and
> > all the classes have the trademark "Z" name prefix removed on anyone's
> > redistributed copies. [...]
>
> More than possible - it's already happened.  As one example, to get
> trademark permission to call a Firefox-based browser Firefox, IIRC you
> have to:
> - include proprietary graphics, which is a problem for debian;
> - use their approved configuration that points at a site which offers
> to install proprietary plugins for you, which is a problem for GNU; and
> - obey some MozCorp release policies, which is a problem for both.

This is different from the case that was being discussed.

Debian's refusal to distribute Firefox because of trademark issues is  
different from if they were being prevented from distributing  
unmodified versions of Firefox by trademark misuse.

> I'm surprised if GPLv3's authors are ignorant of the problems this has
> caused for the GNU and debian projects, or think it's not worth
> addressing when the more limited (at present) problem of swpat is.

Trademarks exist to protect consumers by marking products as having  
come from an identified source. Debian taking Firefox and hacking on  
the code but still releasing it under the Firefox trademark clearly  
breaks this. And it breaks it for the consumer, not for the Mozilla  
Foundation.

You cannot use trademarks to prevent modification of software in the  
same way as copyright or as patents. Trademarks are therefore not the  
same potential or actual threat as patents. You can remove them,  
although it may be very inconvenient to do so.

Given that trademarks can be a considerable inconvenience when  
releasing modified code I agree with Debian's position if not with  
their reasoning. But the nature of trademarks means that this isn't a  
licence issue.

- Rob.