Yeah, the section 7 of GPLv3 indicates two facts: - The GPL needs modification (the additional term) for the embedded font part to prohibit the derivative works from using "Bitstream" or "Arev" names
- Prohibition of sale of the font only package is "further restriction" wihch cannot be allowed by the additional terms So I conclude that the Bfont and Bmonofont cannot be embedded in the Blender executable without violating the GPL. IRIE Shinsuke 13/07/18, David Jeske wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:20 PM, IRIE Shinsuke > <irieshins...@yahoo.co.jp>wrote: > >> Apache 1.1 license is incompatible with the GPL for the similar >> restrictions (The derivative works are prohibited from using "Apache" >> names without prior written permission). >> >> http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Apache1.1 > > > FWIW, GPLv3 seems to specifically allow renaming clauses under section > 7.(c,e) > > 7.Additional Terms. > ... > Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you add > to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders of that > material) supplement the terms of this License with terms: > ... > 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 > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers