legal Digest, Vol 22, Issue 4

[Arnoud Engelfriet]

Ingbert Grimpe wrote:
> This translates to: "The use of the name xt:Commerce and/or the logos 
> for advertisement is only allowed with explicit approval by xt:Commerce"
> If I do make the package publicable available I obviously do need to 
> name it somehow. If I name it xt:Commerce, am I advertising it already? 

If you distribute copies under the name 'xt:Commerce', you infringe
their trademark unless you have permission to do this. Under
trademark law you are not allowed to apply the name to copies
of the original (not even if they are bitwise identical to the
original).

If you change all public appearances of the name, you're fine.
You can even mention somewhere in the documentation that this
software is a repackaged version of the software available
from xt:Commerce. That's just a factual statement and not advertising.

> Because of the legal implications I rather choose NOT to distribute the 
> package (other than to my customers directly via CD/DVD or to make 
> enhancements available. Probably not really what the GPL was made for, 
> but better than to go to court ...

I agree it's annoying, but it does not stop you from redistributing
the software. You "only" have to remove all the labels. I would
hope that a global s/xt:Commerce/SomethingCompletelyDifferent/g
is enough, as 'xt:Commerce' is a quite specific phrase. 

Arnoud

-- 
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/