• [^] # Re: Les licences, ça se respecte

    Posté par (site web personnel) . En réponse au journal UBUNTU vs OVH : ça vous choque ?. Évalué à 10.

    Extrait de https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/39913.html :

    A requirement that you avoid use of trademarks in an infringing way is reasonable. Mozilla products include support for building with branding disabled, which makes it very straightforward for a user to build a modified version of Firefox that can be redistributed without any trademark issues. Red Hat have a similar policy for Fedora and RHEL - you simply replace the packages that contain the branding and you're done.

    Canonical's IP policy around Ubuntu is fundamentally different. While Mozilla make it clear that you simply no longer have a right to use the trademarks under trademark law, Canonical appear to require that you remove all trademarks entirely even if using them wouldn't be a violation of trademark law. While Mozilla restrict the redistribution of modified binaries that include their trademarks, Canonical insist that you rebuild everything even if the package doesn't contain any trademarks. And while Mozilla give you a single build option that creates binaries that conform with their trademark requirements, Canonical will refuse to tell you what you have to do.