trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com wrote: > On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 01:08 -0500, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > >>I am offering, in my official capacity, a possible extension to the >>LICENSE file that would more clearly indicate the circumstances under >>which the Asterisk trademark could be used or not used. Since I posted >>that message, I have realized that any changes in that direction would >>have to be even more 'complete' than what I proposed, so I will work >>with our licensing manager and others to come up with something that is >>in everyone's best interests. >> > > God bless estoppel :) > > >>We certainly do not want to place restrictions on 'bundling' of Asterisk >>into distributions or in other forms where the intent is that the end >>product will still be 'Asterisk', but at the same time we need to >>protect (as you already pointed out in another response) our trademark >>and the license exceptions associated with it. > > > I wouldnt imagine that you would, that kinda goes against making it open > source in the first place. This is one of the problems with making > restrictions in a license, it becomes very murky very quickly. > Especially when dealing with a global marketplace. > > On a side note but vaguely related to this (licensing in general) does > digium charge EU patrons for the g.729 codec? I understand that digium > is in the US and that it can cause them problems if they dont charge, > however there is no legal requirement for anyone in the EU currently to > pay to use the codec, providing they can get it in the first place.
Eh?! So you think that France Telecom hasn't assigned SipPro to handle the licencing for Europe? -- Cheers, Matt Riddell _______________________________________________ http://www.sineapps.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html) http://www.sineapps.com/rssfeed.php (Daily Asterisk News - rss) _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Biz mailing list Asterisk-Biz@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz