grub-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] import multiboot1 specification in grub trunk


From: Isaac Dupree
Subject: Re: [PATCH] import multiboot1 specification in grub trunk
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:14:38 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090608)

Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Isaac
Dupree<address@hidden> wrote:
Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
8) COPYING contains GPLv2. fdl.texi isn't imported.
I'm not a lawyer but following is my analysis
AFAICT only example kernel is under GPL (v2 to be precise) the rest is
either custom license, unclaimed copyright or non-copyrightable.
IMO multiboot specification should be FDL with cover text "Multiboot
specification"
It's better IIRC not to have any cover texts or invariant sections if we
have a choice.
I've checked and it revealed that I had false idea about cover texts.
ACtually the requirement I wanted to impose is that modified copies
can't have the title "Multiboot Specification". Sorry for using
incorrect idea.

quite right; we certainly don't want to *require* that modified texts call themselves Multiboot Specification! Instead we'd like them not to be called that. I'm not sure if copyright law is the right way to do that; sometimes trademarks are; however here we have

FDL 1.3 requirement for modified versions:
"A. Use in the Title Page (and on the covers, if any) a title distinct from that of the Document, and from those of previous versions (which should, if there were any, be listed in the History section of the Document). You may use the same title as a previous version if the original publisher of that version gives permission. "

GPLv3:
"The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date."
and allows certain additional restrictions, especially
"c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in reasonable ways as different from the original version; or" "e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some trade names, trademarks, or service marks; or" ...which are used in Micropolis, based on SimCity code released as GPLv3 by EA who owns the SimCity trademark and guards it jealously <http://code.google.com/p/micropolis/wiki/License>

I think the FDL version 1.3 requirement above is quite sufficient for this document.

-Isaac




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]