Brad Knowles wrote: > If they are now shipping something and calling it 2.1.13 and it's > not exactly the same code that we provide from > <http://www.list.org/download.html>, then I think it's time we had > the PSF and/or FSF lawyers give them a call -- and speaking as a > member of the Mailman Cabal, I will make sure to carry through on > that, if necessary.
Red Hat and most other Linux distributions ship Mailman with various patches, making it very much "not exactly the same code" and the GPL license explicitly grants this freedom. Are you suggesting that trademark guidelines be applied, similar to what Mozilla does for Firefox?¹ I'm not arguing that if a distributor patches Mailman and changes core behavior to the point that it causes confusion for users and potentially sullies Mailman's reputation that it's fine and should be left alone. Just trying to see what grounds on which you want the lawyers to complain. ¹ Because of those trademark restrictions, Debian ships the firefox code with their patches under the name Iceweasel. -- Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed. -- Albert Einstein
pgpUu95JpYu0C.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org