On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Brandon Lozza <brandon(a)pwnage.ca> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Adam Williamson
<awilliam(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> that's the entire point of having trademarks. Free software projects are
> obliged to allow you to access and modify their code. They are not
> obliged to allow you to benefit from their reputation. It doesn't make
> any sense to say 'I think this product needs to be modified but I wish
> to be able to represent my modified product as being the same thing as
> the original product in order to benefit from the reputation attached to
> the original product'.
> --
Trademarks defeat the purpose of it being "free software". They impose
restrictions. You have to remove MoFo's artwork and perform a name
change or you're required to get permission from Mozilla to
redistribute a modified binary.
So?
That's not free.
It is, as you are _free_ to change the name and artwork anytime you want.