I agree with TomM on points one and two. IANAL, but IMO the GPL "further requirements" is to *prevent* burdens being added on the code and distribution. Anti-naming is not a requirement on distributed code but an overly explicit statement of Trademark law (and community convention). Whether we write it or not, there is a legal requirement that Linux not be called "Microsoft Windows". If we wrote that into the license, it would merely seem nonsensical, not a violation of the GPL. It also shall not be named "Mickey Mouse" or "Apple Computer".
The third clause, however, looks like a clear violation of the GPL.. for the GPL will not allow this restriction to the font-code. _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
