Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 20011215T235408-0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > (The canonical example here is TeX > > which has such a restriction.) > > TeX is already a special case as it really does not have a clear > license, but everyone still treats it as free software.
Um, no, TeX has a perfectly clear license. In any case, the point is that normal sorts of trademark issues don't impinge freeness of software. (There might be some case where trademarks are used in a way that *does* cause a problem, but the normal sorts of things are fine.)
