On Wednesday 16 March 2011 23:25:14 Helen South wrote:
Apologies for commenting so late in the piece, but I wanted to raise a couple of small points, for what it's worth -
- "We are pleased to permit you to link to opensuse.org from your web
Do people need permission to link to a website? I've never heard of that before. Permission to use an openSUSE graphic to do so, sure, but to actually link? I feel it sounds rather self-important.
- Please do not create mock or parody products with names based on the
openSUSE Marks. Also, please be aware that, in our opinion, it is not "fair use" to use the openSUSE Marks in a manner that disparages openSUSE technology or the openSUSE Project.
I'm pretty sure that there is no legal leg to stand on in regards to a genuine parody. "Please do not create mock or parody products"? I can't help thinking this is an invitation to create a lime-green distribution called monoSUZY :)
I'm also a little concerned about the 'in our opinion' regarding disparagement, since the only opinion that matters is the court's, which I expect have a list of very specific definitions of what constitutes fair use and disparagement and what doesn't.
I think these two paragraphs are not so much meant to set strict legal requirements, but to explain the intention of the guidelines, and give people examples what we like to see, and what we don't like to see. That's actually something I like about the guidelines text, that it's not only legalese, but tries to transport and explain the intention and meaning of the guidelines. So from my point of view, I would leave them as they are.