Trademarks

[Owen Taylor]

On Sat, 2005-07-02 at 14:22 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> Should one acknowledge trademarks somehow in all package summaries and
> descriptions in Extras?  I think yes, but I don't see this mentioned in
> the Wiki anywhere, and there are many packages that would need to be
> updated wrt. this.
> 
> For example, I'm committing an update to the kernel-module-thinkpad in a
> jiffy, with the following summary and description.  Would this be
> ok/needed in all packages that refer to US/other trademarks, or is it
> possible to have a "blanket trademark acknowledgement" somewhere?  Or
> something else?

[ Insert "not a lawyer" disclaimer ]

My understanding is that there is no obligation to acknowledge
trademarks in this sort of descriptive use. 

The worry I'd have about acknowledging *some* trademarks, is that there
might be an implication that things that we don't acknowledge aren't
trademarks.

And having to acknowledge Linux, GNOME, KDE, etc, could clutter up
the package descriptions just a bit :-)

Regards,
						Owen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20050702/09869292/attachment.sig>