First: They have no license for their own code/scripts? That seems odd. If they don't specify otherwise, maybe they consider them to be derivative works of other GPL software. Their answer to quesiton 2 seems to indicate that all the software on the CD is under GPL.
Second: The GPL does not apply to the MEPIS name and logo. They are trademarks, which have different rules than copyright that the GPL is based on. You cannot site the GPL for trademarks.
Third: You cannot sell MEPIS CDs without permission because, according to their two statements you quote, you are not allowed to gain commercially from use of their TRADEMARKS.
Therefore: If you strip the MEPIS name and logo from the entire CD, perhaps replacing it with something of your own, you could sell the resulting distro. However, it would not be a MEPIS distro anymore, would it.
MEPIS, perhaps on purpose, is also not clearly defining the difference between GPL/copyright and trademark. They should.
If you sell Mepis CDs with the Mepis name and logo you are commercially profiting from their trademarks. Would a Mepis-stripped-of-Mepis-tradmarks so-it-can't-be-called-Mepis CD sell as well as a "real" Mepis CD? No, because that is the value of the Mepis name. Why should you be able to benefit from the value they created if you don't have their permission to do so?
I'll say it again: The GPL does not apply to trademarks. Trademarks are not, nor can they ever be, Free Software. They are not software. You could argue that the Mepis group should license their tradmarks under a Creative Commons License or make the trademarks available for free use. But even if they don't do that, it is still correct to state that Mepis is Free Software as long as the *software* is under the GPL or a GPL compatible copyright license.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
You are both confused
Posted by: alandd on November 13, 2005 01:24 AMSecond: The GPL does not apply to the MEPIS name and logo. They are trademarks, which have different rules than copyright that the GPL is based on. You cannot site the GPL for trademarks.
Third: You cannot sell MEPIS CDs without permission because, according to their two statements you quote, you are not allowed to gain commercially from use of their TRADEMARKS.
Therefore: If you strip the MEPIS name and logo from the entire CD, perhaps replacing it with something of your own, you could sell the resulting distro. However, it would not be a MEPIS distro anymore, would it.
MEPIS, perhaps on purpose, is also not clearly defining the difference between GPL/copyright and trademark. They should.
If you sell Mepis CDs with the Mepis name and logo you are commercially profiting from their trademarks. Would a Mepis-stripped-of-Mepis-tradmarks so-it-can't-be-called-Mepis CD sell as well as a "real" Mepis CD? No, because that is the value of the Mepis name. Why should you be able to benefit from the value they created if you don't have their permission to do so?
I'll say it again: The GPL does not apply to trademarks. Trademarks are not, nor can they ever be, Free Software. They are not software. You could argue that the Mepis group should license their tradmarks under a Creative Commons License or make the trademarks available for free use. But even if they don't do that, it is still correct to state that Mepis is Free Software as long as the *software* is under the GPL or a GPL compatible copyright license.
#