You obviously do not understand trademarks OR. copyright. Here's an example: Go put Microsoft "artwork" as you call it onto OpenSUSE. Watch how fast MS would sue for trademark infringement as well as copyright infringement. Trademarks can exist just as well as copyrights. Further, Novell can copyright AND trademark artwork. Copyright exists at creation of artwork, and does not become immediately GPL'd just because you release most software under the GPL. Last paragraph in section 2: "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License." Just because the software is GPL does not require the copyrighted non-GPL'd artwork to become GPL'd. This thread is becoming rapidly redundant. Someone could "whitebox" OpenSUSE, or not, but that is where this ought to end. RP Marcel Mourguiart wrote:
Ok, but I have never see that probed in court, have you ? And if not probedit in court at least it should be written in some place, it is ??
For example what you call logos trademark I can easily called art work.
What you are saying is that I can't sell a CD and called SUSE or Novell, I agree with that, but what about the SUSE and Novell logos that come inside the cdrom in a GPLd package, package that have been gpld for SUSE/Novell it self.
-- Marcel Mourguiart