imagemagick trademark.
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios
Does anyone know if imagemagick has a non-floss trademark or a floss supporting trademark?
https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:philosophy:incompatible_packages
Or does it let changes be made like...
The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2).
The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
Further below:
Rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable, if they don't substantively limit your freedom to release modified versions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately. Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change the name of the modified version, remove a logo, or identify your modifications as yours. As long as these requirements are not so burdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing your changes, they are acceptable; you're already making other changes to the program, so you won't have trouble making a few more.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#packaging
Trademarks aim to enforce such acceptable rules. So, as long as the trademark policy is not overreaching, there should be no issue. Can you point us to a policy for the trademark "ImageMagick"?
This link has a license.
https://imagemagick.org/script/license.php
This license shows a large amount of things, but I see at least 2 things about trademarks, though there may be more.
4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You meet the following conditions:
You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files; and
You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works; and
If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License.
You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and may provide additional or different license terms and conditions for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use, reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with the conditions stated in this License.
and
6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor, except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
I think this link shows the trademark was Registered And Renewed at
Status Date
2014-09-12
Filing Date
2003-11-27
Registration Number
2990481
Registration Date
2005-08-30
https://trademarks.justia.com/783/33/imagemagick-78333969.html
https://github.com/ImageMagick/ImageMagick
also may have more license information.
So seeing you may need to
You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works;
and that
6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor, except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
I do you know the best way to comply with this, though it could be a floss license, though I did not yet read it all.
Also I'm not a lawyer, so I do not know all about "reasonable and customary use" in trademark use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:ImageMagick#License
may also help.
Free software and trademark don't have to conflict, and I see no issues here, as opposed to other trademark policies which are clearly problematic.
"You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that..."
Other free software licenses also require preservation of notices like copyright and license notices (look at the GPL for an example but practically all free licenses have *some* kind of notice preservation requirement of *some* kind or other.) That doesn't seem much different. Note that it's not requiring that any be added; only to preserve whatever's there. So: Just don't delete them and you're automatically in compliance with that piece. Very easy.
"This License does not grant permission to use..."
This is not different from any other free software license. The GPL, for example, also doesn't grant trademark rights either. Trademark is a different area of law, and the GPL's silence on trademarks mean none are granted. There's no harm in some license explicitly saying that you're not getting any trademark rights. The outcome's the same either way.
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios