"Any redistribution of modified versions of Ubuntu must be approved, certified or provided by Canonical if you are going to associate it with the Trademarks."
"If you are producing software for use with or on Ubuntu you may reference Ubuntu, but must avoid: (i) any implication of endorsement, or (ii) any attempt to unfairly or confusingly capitalise on the goodwill of Canonical or Ubuntu."
So let me summarize. - GPL is out of scope - Personal Use or internal organisational use is out of scope - Redistribution is out of scope, provided you don't want to associate your altered package with Ubuntu trademarks, which does not mean you can't refer to Ubuntu
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
Is that so ?
Date: 2015-07-21 12:06 pm (UTC)"If you are producing software for use with or on Ubuntu you may reference Ubuntu, but must avoid: (i) any implication of endorsement, or (ii) any attempt to unfairly or confusingly capitalise on the goodwill of Canonical or Ubuntu."
So let me summarize.
- GPL is out of scope
- Personal Use or internal organisational use is out of scope
- Redistribution is out of scope, provided you don't want to associate your altered package with Ubuntu trademarks, which does not mean you can't refer to Ubuntu