[Asterisk-biz] Asterisk Ffork - OpenPBX.org

[Peter Nixon]

On Sunday 09 October 2005 00:44, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Dinesh Nair wrote:
> > after the original asterisk source is untarred, and the freebsd specific
> > patches are applied to it, it ceases to be Asterisk(tm), correct ? since
> > the compilation and linking with openh323/openssl happens after it
> > ceases to be Asterisk(tm), then how does this make the freebsd asterisk
> > port GPL-legal ?
>
> There is no 'legality', there is only license conformance or
> non-conformance. Non-conformance to the license exposes you to action
> from the copyright holder(s), should they choose to take any. There is
> no 'illegal' or 'legal' involved.
>
> All of this is only relevant (as another poster has posted) to
> redistribution; making modifications on your own system and using the
> results does not in itself violate the GPL. It may, however, violate the
> license of other software that you link it with, so if you link it with
> OpenH.323 then you may have violated the license under which you
> received that software.
>
> If you distribute those binaries linked against license-incompatible,
> then you are violating the terms of the GPL under which you received the
> source code. The copyright holder(s) can then choose to take action to
> stop you from distributing the infringing items, or sue you for damages.
> They can also choose to do nothing.
>
> It would be highly counter-productive for Digium (or any other Asterisk
> copyright holders, of which there are a large number) to take action
> against a Linux distribution vendor, FreeBSD or any other 'packager' for
> using the Asterisk trademark on binaries they distribute to their users.
> However, that does not mean we cannot take action against any other
> parties that distribute modified source code (or binaries made from
> such) and call it 'Asterisk', if we deem it prudent to do so.

Firstly, I am not a lawyer myself, however my understanding is that if a 
trademark holder only selectively enforces a trademark in the manner you 
mention above then eventually the trademark holder can lose their 
trademark...

You are also confusing trademark and copyright in the above statement...

-- 

Peter Nixon
http://www.peternixon.net/
PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc