Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 09 Oct 2008 08:53:31 +0000:
>> Yet I don't see the big deal about GNU/Linux, either. > > Don't you agree with the reasons at > http://gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html? Within context, no. It'd be a very good thing if distributions better differentiated free and unfree and let people know the difference, but that has little to do with whether they call it Linux or GNU/Linux. >> And no, I'm /not/ going to start calling my particular subset of what >> my distribution makes available >> Gentoo/~amd64/KDE/X.org/GNU/Linux! > > You don't have to. > http://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#many ... And I say they get credit if they wish it, in the individual applications. That's appropriate. Demanding the entire distribution give them credit in the form of the name chosen, is not, and strikes me as very similar to the old SugarCRM style license, considered non-free due to the requirement for logos, etc, on the various resulting content pages (it's a web app, the logo was required on the web pages) to identify them. Were the GNU in GNU/Linux to be legally required, it would be in exactly the same position. Luckily, it's not, altho someone that so clearly sees the evil of unfree software in other contexts seems to think ethics (if not legality) requires it here. It doesn't matter whether the name in question is Linux or "A heifer jumped over the moon". Requiring, so-called ethically or legally, a specific name extension, "GNU/"whatever, would be unfree. >> As I said earlier, ask any linguist, > > There is an easy solution if "GNU/Linux" is so hard to pronounce -- say > just "GNU". I often do that when I refer to all GNU variants in general > (GNU/Linux, GNU/kFreeBSD, GNU/Hurd). Besides, "GNU/Linux" is not hard > to say and write in the languages I know. But Linux has an accepted general meaning. So does GNU, but its meaning is different, and neither one is required, nor can it be, legally or ethically. OTOH, trade-mark-wise, one can require that a name /if/ /used/ be used in a particular way and under particular conditions, with the usual fair use exceptions. Thus we have "Firefox", which comes with certain requirements for what any browser software claiming that name must contain, but there's nothing wrong with calling it "Iceweasel" instead, and indeed, calling it /something/ else is required if the conditions for calling it Firefox are not met. In that particular example, I think they're being a bit petty, but that's a legal and even Stallman would argue to some degree, ethical right they have. Certainly, he defends the use of the GNU rights and trademark logo, for instance. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
