On May 17, 2007, Max Spevack <mspevack redhat com> wrote:
The compilation is made available under the GNU General Public
License version 2.
I don't quite understand what this is supposed to mean.
Is it correct to assume that the legal implications of this move have
been run through legal, and that it is not in fact a problem to
release under the GPL a compilation that includes both software and
other kinds of copyrightable works, some of which are licensed under
licenses that are incompatible with the GPL? And that this doesn't
amount to dual-licensing logos and trademarks that are AFAIK supposed
to be offered under the trademark policy only, not under the GPL?
If nothing else, some major clarification of what this means would be
in order, otherwise people might get impressions that they can do
things we don't mean them to do (like modifying non-Free firmware or
invariant sections of GFDL documents we ship, or using our logos and
trademarks without complying with the trademark policites).