From limb at jcomserv.net Sat Jul 14 01:48:15 2007 From: limb at jcomserv.net (Jon Ciesla) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 20:48:15 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Armagetron: clarification Message-ID: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> I know Armagetron is on the will not package list, and I know it's due to trademark issues. Is there more to that that just the name? If not, then either we need to package it or drop/modify kdegames, as it has ktron, which, AFAICT, meets the same standard. If this has been discussed previously and I missed it, I apologize, but I'm just curious as to what the litmus test is. Jon -- novus ordo absurdum From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Jul 14 07:51:19 2007 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 09:51:19 +0200 Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> Message-ID: <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> Hi all, Jon Ciesla wrote: > I know Armagetron is on the will not package list, and I know it's due to > trademark issues. Is there more to that that just the name? If not, then > either we need to package it or drop/modify kdegames, as it has ktron, > which, AFAICT, meets the same standard. > Indeed it does, I think the name for that should be changed or it should be dropped. > If this has been discussed previously and I missed it, I apologize, but > I'm just curious as to what the litmus test is. > It hasn't been discussed before, I've added Spot to the CC as he usually makes the decisions surrounding legal stuff. Tom, my assessment of the situation is that ktron indeed is a problem too. While at the subject, I think that renaming Armagetron and removing any references to Tron from the docs / text printed in the game, should make Armagetron acceptabl, do you agree? And is anyone willing todo this? Regards, Hans From tcallawa at redhat.com Sat Jul 14 13:22:34 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:22:34 -0500 Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 09:51 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi all, > > Jon Ciesla wrote: > > I know Armagetron is on the will not package list, and I know it's due to > > trademark issues. Is there more to that that just the name? If not, then > > either we need to package it or drop/modify kdegames, as it has ktron, > > which, AFAICT, meets the same standard. > > > > Indeed it does, I think the name for that should be changed or it should be > dropped. > > > If this has been discussed previously and I missed it, I apologize, but > > I'm just curious as to what the litmus test is. > > > > It hasn't been discussed before, I've added Spot to the CC as he usually makes > the decisions surrounding legal stuff. Tom, my assessment of the situation is > that ktron indeed is a problem too. > > While at the subject, I think that renaming Armagetron and removing any > references to Tron from the docs / text printed in the game, should make > Armagetron acceptabl, do you agree? And is anyone willing todo this? Yes. This is the conclusion that Red Hat came to several years ago as well. As long as it isn't using the exact same graphics and sounds, and doesn't use the trademark (or any derivation of the trademark), it's fine. Ktron and Armagetron need to be renamed. Klightcars, for example. I have no suggestion for Armagetron. ~spot From limb at jcomserv.net Sun Jul 15 06:18:25 2007 From: limb at jcomserv.net (Jon Ciesla) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 01:18:25 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <2714.192.168.0.1.1184480305.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> > On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 09:51 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Jon Ciesla wrote: >> > I know Armagetron is on the will not package list, and I know it's due >> to >> > trademark issues. Is there more to that that just the name? If not, >> then >> > either we need to package it or drop/modify kdegames, as it has ktron, >> > which, AFAICT, meets the same standard. >> > >> >> Indeed it does, I think the name for that should be changed or it should >> be >> dropped. >> >> > If this has been discussed previously and I missed it, I apologize, >> but >> > I'm just curious as to what the litmus test is. >> > >> >> It hasn't been discussed before, I've added Spot to the CC as he usually >> makes >> the decisions surrounding legal stuff. Tom, my assessment of the >> situation is >> that ktron indeed is a problem too. >> >> While at the subject, I think that renaming Armagetron and removing any >> references to Tron from the docs / text printed in the game, should make >> Armagetron acceptabl, do you agree? And is anyone willing todo this? > > Yes. This is the conclusion that Red Hat came to several years ago as > well. > > As long as it isn't using the exact same graphics and sounds, and > doesn't use the trademark (or any derivation of the trademark), it's > fine. > > Ktron and Armagetron need to be renamed. Klightcars, for example. I have > no suggestion for Armagetron. I would be willing, and could likely come up with names. :) > ~spot > -- novus ordo absurdum From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Jul 16 10:08:39 2007 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:08:39 +0200 Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <2714.192.168.0.1.1184480305.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <2714.192.168.0.1.1184480305.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> Message-ID: <469B43A7.1080301@hhs.nl> Jon Ciesla wrote: >> On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 09:51 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Jon Ciesla wrote: >>>> I know Armagetron is on the will not package list, and I know it's due >>> to >>>> trademark issues. Is there more to that that just the name? If not, >>> then >>>> either we need to package it or drop/modify kdegames, as it has ktron, >>>> which, AFAICT, meets the same standard. >>>> >>> Indeed it does, I think the name for that should be changed or it should >>> be >>> dropped. >>> >>>> If this has been discussed previously and I missed it, I apologize, >>> but >>>> I'm just curious as to what the litmus test is. >>>> >>> It hasn't been discussed before, I've added Spot to the CC as he usually >>> makes >>> the decisions surrounding legal stuff. Tom, my assessment of the >>> situation is >>> that ktron indeed is a problem too. >>> >>> While at the subject, I think that renaming Armagetron and removing any >>> references to Tron from the docs / text printed in the game, should make >>> Armagetron acceptabl, do you agree? And is anyone willing todo this? >> Yes. This is the conclusion that Red Hat came to several years ago as >> well. >> >> As long as it isn't using the exact same graphics and sounds, and >> doesn't use the trademark (or any derivation of the trademark), it's >> fine. >> >> Ktron and Armagetron need to be renamed. Klightcars, for example. I have >> no suggestion for Armagetron. > > I would be willing, and could likely come up with names. :) > Cool, let me know when you've got something to review. Be sure to kindly inform upstream that we will be including a version under a different name. It would be good to let them choose if you can come up with several names. I've filed a bug to get ktron renamed here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248343 Regards, Hans From limb at jcomserv.net Mon Jul 16 18:29:12 2007 From: limb at jcomserv.net (Jon Ciesla) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:29:12 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <469B43A7.1080301@hhs.nl> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <2714.192.168.0.1.1184480305.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469B43A7.1080301@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <4902.65.192.24.164.1184610552.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> > Jon Ciesla wrote: >>> On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 09:51 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Jon Ciesla wrote: >>>>> I know Armagetron is on the will not package list, and I know it's >>>>> due >>>> to >>>>> trademark issues. Is there more to that that just the name? If not, >>>> then >>>>> either we need to package it or drop/modify kdegames, as it has >>>>> ktron, >>>>> which, AFAICT, meets the same standard. >>>>> >>>> Indeed it does, I think the name for that should be changed or it >>>> should >>>> be >>>> dropped. >>>> >>>>> If this has been discussed previously and I missed it, I apologize, >>>> but >>>>> I'm just curious as to what the litmus test is. >>>>> >>>> It hasn't been discussed before, I've added Spot to the CC as he >>>> usually >>>> makes >>>> the decisions surrounding legal stuff. Tom, my assessment of the >>>> situation is >>>> that ktron indeed is a problem too. >>>> >>>> While at the subject, I think that renaming Armagetron and removing >>>> any >>>> references to Tron from the docs / text printed in the game, should >>>> make >>>> Armagetron acceptabl, do you agree? And is anyone willing todo this? >>> Yes. This is the conclusion that Red Hat came to several years ago as >>> well. >>> >>> As long as it isn't using the exact same graphics and sounds, and >>> doesn't use the trademark (or any derivation of the trademark), it's >>> fine. >>> >>> Ktron and Armagetron need to be renamed. Klightcars, for example. I >>> have >>> no suggestion for Armagetron. >> >> I would be willing, and could likely come up with names. :) >> > > Cool, let me know when you've got something to review. Be sure to kindly > inform > upstream that we will be including a version under a different name. It > would > be good to let them choose if you can come up with several names. > > I've filed a bug to get ktron renamed here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248343 To clarify further, would it be adequate to sed -i s/old/new/ the infringing text where it occurs, changing filenames/paths as appropriate, at build time, or should the source tarball be modified beforehand, to prevent presence of infringing material in distributed SRPMS? Jon > Regards, > > Hans > -- novus ordo absurdum From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Jul 16 19:42:11 2007 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:42:11 +0200 Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <4902.65.192.24.164.1184610552.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <2714.192.168.0.1.1184480305.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469B43A7.1080301@hhs.nl> <4902.65.192.24.164.1184610552.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> Message-ID: <469BCA13.5070806@hhs.nl> Jon Ciesla wrote: >> Jon Ciesla wrote: >>>> On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 09:51 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Jon Ciesla wrote: >>>>>> I know Armagetron is on the will not package list, and I know it's >>>>>> due >>>>> to >>>>>> trademark issues. Is there more to that that just the name? If not, >>>>> then >>>>>> either we need to package it or drop/modify kdegames, as it has >>>>>> ktron, >>>>>> which, AFAICT, meets the same standard. >>>>>> >>>>> Indeed it does, I think the name for that should be changed or it >>>>> should >>>>> be >>>>> dropped. >>>>> >>>>>> If this has been discussed previously and I missed it, I apologize, >>>>> but >>>>>> I'm just curious as to what the litmus test is. >>>>>> >>>>> It hasn't been discussed before, I've added Spot to the CC as he >>>>> usually >>>>> makes >>>>> the decisions surrounding legal stuff. Tom, my assessment of the >>>>> situation is >>>>> that ktron indeed is a problem too. >>>>> >>>>> While at the subject, I think that renaming Armagetron and removing >>>>> any >>>>> references to Tron from the docs / text printed in the game, should >>>>> make >>>>> Armagetron acceptabl, do you agree? And is anyone willing todo this? >>>> Yes. This is the conclusion that Red Hat came to several years ago as >>>> well. >>>> >>>> As long as it isn't using the exact same graphics and sounds, and >>>> doesn't use the trademark (or any derivation of the trademark), it's >>>> fine. >>>> >>>> Ktron and Armagetron need to be renamed. Klightcars, for example. I >>>> have >>>> no suggestion for Armagetron. >>> I would be willing, and could likely come up with names. :) >>> >> Cool, let me know when you've got something to review. Be sure to kindly >> inform >> upstream that we will be including a version under a different name. It >> would >> be good to let them choose if you can come up with several names. >> >> I've filed a bug to get ktron renamed here: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248343 > > To clarify further, would it be adequate to sed -i s/old/new/ the > infringing text where it occurs, changing filenames/paths as appropriate, > at build time, or should the source tarball be modified beforehand, to > prevent presence of infringing material in distributed SRPMS? > In order to infringe a trademark one must "advertise" with it, so its fine to just use patches / sed as you like. This is all AFAIK, IANAL ofcourse, but this is what other troublesome packages have been doing sofar. Regards, Hans From limb at jcomserv.net Tue Jul 17 15:39:15 2007 From: limb at jcomserv.net (Jon Ciesla) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:39:15 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <469BCA13.5070806@hhs.nl> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <2714.192.168.0.1.1184480305.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469B43A7.1080301@hhs.nl> <4902.65.192.24.164.1184610552.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469BCA13.5070806@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <23521.65.192.24.164.1184686755.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> > Jon Ciesla wrote: >>> Jon Ciesla wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 09:51 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Jon Ciesla wrote: >>>>>>> I know Armagetron is on the will not package list, and I know it's >>>>>>> due >>>>>> to >>>>>>> trademark issues. Is there more to that that just the name? If >>>>>>> not, >>>>>> then >>>>>>> either we need to package it or drop/modify kdegames, as it has >>>>>>> ktron, >>>>>>> which, AFAICT, meets the same standard. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Indeed it does, I think the name for that should be changed or it >>>>>> should >>>>>> be >>>>>> dropped. >>>>>> >>>>>>> If this has been discussed previously and I missed it, I apologize, >>>>>> but >>>>>>> I'm just curious as to what the litmus test is. >>>>>>> >>>>>> It hasn't been discussed before, I've added Spot to the CC as he >>>>>> usually >>>>>> makes >>>>>> the decisions surrounding legal stuff. Tom, my assessment of the >>>>>> situation is >>>>>> that ktron indeed is a problem too. >>>>>> >>>>>> While at the subject, I think that renaming Armagetron and removing >>>>>> any >>>>>> references to Tron from the docs / text printed in the game, should >>>>>> make >>>>>> Armagetron acceptabl, do you agree? And is anyone willing todo this? >>>>> Yes. This is the conclusion that Red Hat came to several years ago as >>>>> well. >>>>> >>>>> As long as it isn't using the exact same graphics and sounds, and >>>>> doesn't use the trademark (or any derivation of the trademark), it's >>>>> fine. >>>>> >>>>> Ktron and Armagetron need to be renamed. Klightcars, for example. I >>>>> have >>>>> no suggestion for Armagetron. >>>> I would be willing, and could likely come up with names. :) >>>> >>> Cool, let me know when you've got something to review. Be sure to >>> kindly >>> inform >>> upstream that we will be including a version under a different name. It >>> would >>> be good to let them choose if you can come up with several names. >>> >>> I've filed a bug to get ktron renamed here: >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248343 >> >> To clarify further, would it be adequate to sed -i s/old/new/ the >> infringing text where it occurs, changing filenames/paths as >> appropriate, >> at build time, or should the source tarball be modified beforehand, to >> prevent presence of infringing material in distributed SRPMS? >> > > In order to infringe a trademark one must "advertise" with it, so its fine > to > just use patches / sed as you like. > > This is all AFAIK, IANAL ofcourse, but this is what other troublesome > packages > have been doing sofar. I've got a basic package ready that's modified somewhat to fit Fedora's filesystem layout. I still need to add a Desktop file, and clarify the handling of the user account for the -dedicated package. It comes with a script that tries to do it for you, as well as the initscript portion. Before I test those, I'd like to know whether I should use upstream's scripts, or if there's a preferred way of handling the user and initscript issues in the spec. I'm also looking for more detail as far as how deeply the name needs to be changed. I know I have to change the package name, the name displayed in Desktop, and the name as seen in-game. What about path names, variable names, etc? > Regards, > > Hans > -- novus ordo absurdum From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Jul 17 17:15:23 2007 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:15:23 +0200 Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <23521.65.192.24.164.1184686755.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <2714.192.168.0.1.1184480305.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469B43A7.1080301@hhs.nl> <4902.65.192.24.164.1184610552.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469BCA13.5070806@hhs.nl> <23521.65.192.24.164.1184686755.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> Message-ID: <469CF92B.4060501@hhs.nl> Jon Ciesla wrote: >> Jon Ciesla wrote: >>> To clarify further, would it be adequate to sed -i s/old/new/ the >>> infringing text where it occurs, changing filenames/paths as >>> appropriate, >>> at build time, or should the source tarball be modified beforehand, to >>> prevent presence of infringing material in distributed SRPMS? >>> >> In order to infringe a trademark one must "advertise" with it, so its fine >> to >> just use patches / sed as you like. >> >> This is all AFAIK, IANAL ofcourse, but this is what other troublesome >> packages >> have been doing sofar. > > I've got a basic package ready that's modified somewhat to fit Fedora's > filesystem layout. I still need to add a Desktop file, and clarify the > handling of the user account for the -dedicated package. It comes with a > script that tries to do it for you, as well as the initscript portion. > Before I test those, I'd like to know whether I should use upstream's > scripts, or if there's a preferred way of handling the user and initscript > issues in the spec. > Does this user uid need to be persistent over different installs within the same network? If so it needs special handling, else just an adduser from %pre, with the proper shell (or better lack there of), description, homedir etc, will suffice. Do not remove this user on erase, unless you are 100% sure that no files owned by it will be left behind under for example /var after erase. > I'm also looking for more detail as far as how deeply the name needs to be > changed. I know I have to change the package name, the name displayed in > Desktop, and the name as seen in-game. What about path names, variable > names, etc? > Only user visible things need to be changed, again think "advertising" not as in adds, but as in visible in the spash screen, etc. So variables are not an issue at all, path names / filenames are not an issue either AFAIK. Spot? Regards, Hans From tcallawa at redhat.com Wed Jul 18 23:11:40 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:11:40 -0500 Subject: Armagetron: clarification In-Reply-To: <469CF92B.4060501@hhs.nl> References: <1345.192.168.0.1.1184377695.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <46988077.9090505@hhs.nl> <1184419354.3337.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <2714.192.168.0.1.1184480305.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469B43A7.1080301@hhs.nl> <4902.65.192.24.164.1184610552.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469BCA13.5070806@hhs.nl> <23521.65.192.24.164.1184686755.squirrel@mail.jcomserv.net> <469CF92B.4060501@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1184800300.4026.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> > So variables are not an issue at all, path names / filenames are not an issue > either AFAIK. Spot? That is correct. The only places where we are concerned are really the following: - Desktop Menu Items (the user should not think that they are launching the "trademark" item) - What the game calls itself when it is running (e.g. the contents in the title of the window) - Anything visible to the user during execution (if the game shows the trademark, its out) - The documentation needs to be cleaned (no references to the trademark, other than anything that would fall under the Lanham Act, aka, Fair Use) Path names, filenames are not a concern according to RH Legal. Internal variables which are not shown to the user during execution (if char * ktron has "KTron" in it, you'd need to change the contents, not the variable name) are also ok. When in doubt, ask. :) ~spot