[sldev] license for static content

Rob Lanphier robla at lindenlab.com
Tue Feb 6 21:03:06 PST 2007

On 2/6/07 7:10 PM, Jason Giglio wrote:
> John Hurliman wrote:
> >
> > http://secondlife.com/corporate/trademark/distribution.php says:
> >
> > "Those taking full advantage of the open-source elements of Linden's
> > products and making significant functional changes may not redistribute
> > the fruits of their labor under any Linden trademark."
> >
> > Further up the page it says that distribution of unaltered binaries
> > (including Linden trademarks) is fine. So from my understanding, Fedora
> > redistributing the static content along with viewer source code
> and/or a
> > compiled viewer is fine, but opensecondlife.org redistributing the
> > static content along with their modified viewer is infringing.
> Red Hat often patches versions they distribute.  It is likely they
> can't distribute a version with trademarks either.
The policy says "significant functional changes".  I am assuming that
any Red Hat patches would be minor integration issues, such as changing
locations for files, but not behavioral changes.  Assuming they maintain
a similar policy toward the Second Life viewer as they do with other
open source projects that maintain strict trademark guidelines (e.g.
Firefox), they should be just fine.
> That really doesn't even address whether the static cache that doesn't
> contain trademarks can be distributed or not.  There's tons of assets
> there that are not trademark material.
We have a discussion internally already about this issue, but I don't
imagine it'll get solved this week (while Ginsu is out).  In the
meantime, it's easiest to lump them all together.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070206/1350f9be/signature-0001.pgp

More information about the SLDev mailing list