hplip: hp-toolbox advertising?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Rex Dieter wrote:
> Nicu Buculei wrote:
> 
>> Rex Dieter wrote:
> 
>>> Yuck, murky waters.  I figured if an icon/logo was included within GPL
>>> sources, and the GPL allows for unrestricted modification/redistribution,
>>> we were golden.  Note, we're not talking about modifying the
>>> *trademarked* item in this case (which I would agree not a good idea),
>>> only using/displaying it.
> 
>> Is not like that, consider the Red Hat icons/logos included in the GPL
>> RHEL sources, a derivative distro is required to change them.
> 
> Yuck (again), my simple-minded non-lawyer common sense tells me such items
> shouldn't be using the GPL then, but that's just me.

The Red Hat logos are not under GPL. The package license of the two 
relevant packages and the EULA makes this clear. They are merely part of 
the distribution which has components under several different licenses.

Rahul