If you are going to make a clarifying footnote, then it ought to be accurate. Yours isn't. Your footnote:
And by "interpreted as meaning" I mean that's what it says and Canonical refuse to say otherwise
It doesn't say that you can't redistribute. It says you can't redistribute *if you are going to associate it with trademarks.* That is completely clear legally. The fact is that you get yourself hung up on the IPP's further (and overbroad) language of what it means to "associate it with trademarks." Specifically:
Otherwise you must remove and replace the Trademarks and will need to recompile the source code to create your own binaries. This does not affect your rights under any open source licence applicable to any of the components of Ubuntu.
Of course this probably should mean that it's OK to simply remove *outward facing* Trademarks/associations. And, yes, it's unfortunate that Canonical won't go on record to affirm that when you asked. But what do we do in the business world when they don't respond when asked nicely? You create a distro removing outward associations and sue for summary judgement that it doesn't infringe. i.e. You can force them to answer and if they don't, have a judge provide the answer.
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.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Your Footnote
Date: 2016-12-02 04:30 pm (UTC)And by "interpreted as meaning" I mean that's what it says and Canonical refuse to say otherwise
It doesn't say that you can't redistribute. It says you can't redistribute *if you are going to associate it with trademarks.* That is completely clear legally. The fact is that you get yourself hung up on the IPP's further
(and overbroad) language of what it means to "associate it with trademarks." Specifically:
Otherwise you must remove and replace the Trademarks and will need to recompile the source code to create your own binaries. This does not affect your rights under any open source licence applicable to any of the components of Ubuntu.
Of course this probably should mean that it's OK to simply remove *outward facing* Trademarks/associations. And, yes, it's unfortunate that Canonical won't go on record to affirm that when you asked. But what do we do in the business world when they don't respond when asked nicely? You create a distro removing outward associations and sue for summary judgement that it doesn't infringe. i.e. You can force them to answer and if they don't, have a judge provide the answer.
So stop whining and get a court ruling!