License of CTU logo files

[JakubVanek]

Hello,

I have been playing with creating a proper Ubuntu/Debian package for Zero eLab Viewer. What I have is currently available in the https://github.com/JakubVanek/zeroelabviewer_pkg/tree/feature/packaging repository/branch . I have also managed to make this working in OpenSUSE Build service (~universal repo for multiple distros): https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:linuxtardis:sdi_linux_pkgs/zero-elabviewer

However, I hit a peculiar problem. As part of the packaging, I need to declare under what licenses are the various source files available. I also need to do this for the CTU logo files. I am currently assuming that they are under GNU GPL as well (https://github.com/JakubVanek/zeroelabviewer_pkg/commit/67b7562ef60e54f4dc4091e7f7350f75553522e9), but I think that this is not the case. Would you be able to help me with this?

Thank you

Jakub Vaněk

[JakubVanek]

Regarding the packaging - I did this mostly to "scratch an itch" and I'm not sure I am able to maintain the package in the long run. I have some ideas on how to make it more bearable (e.g. automating this via GitHub Actions), but that might take some work.

[JakubVanek]

CCing @ppisa, with which I have been occasionally communicating about the packaging. Would you be able to help here somehow? (If it would require some larger research or contacting more people, feel free to skip this)

I basically don't know how to handle these three files:

• https://github.com/adamberlinger/zero_elabviewer/blob/master/resources/img/ctu_logo_small_en.png
• https://github.com/adamberlinger/zero_elabviewer/blob/master/resources/img/ctu_logo_tiny_en.png
• https://github.com/adamberlinger/zero_elabviewer/blob/master/resources/img/LOGO_CTU_AJ_bold.png

The following is unclear to me.

• Can I legally distribute these files (or, rather, binary artifacts built from them) in a Linux package repository?
• Under what license and author shall I declare them? (i.e. what to put in debian/copyright)
• If I cannot distribute them, is it OK to distribute the program without them? My thoughts are that it would be legally OK, but the people from the Department of Measurement might be disappointed (the app would no longer prominently feature their logo - see below).

[ppisa]

I basically don't know how to handle these three files:

The following is unclear to me.

* Can I legally distribute these files (or, rather, binary artifacts built from them) in a Linux package repository?

* Under what license and author shall I declare them? (i.e. what to put in `debian/copyright`)

* If I cannot distribute them, is it OK to distribute the program without them? My thoughts are that it would be legally OK, but the people from the Department of Measurement might be disappointed

I agree that this can be problematic.

But application is licensed under GPL-3.0 (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.de.html) and this license provides section 7. Additional Terms. There is stated

Additional permissions may be written to require their own removal in certain cases when you modify the work.

On the other hand, an unmodified work is considered GPL-3.0 as the whole.

But for modified version there are possible, very limited, limitations

c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in reasonable ways as different from the original version; or d) Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or authors of the material; or e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some trade names, trademarks, or service marks; or

So it is possible to state that this material is copyrighted by CTU FEE and modified version has to state that it is modified, not directly provided by original authors, and more substantial modifications require removal of logos but keeping information displayed in about box that project is based on work of CTU FEE Department of Measurement.

I am not sure, what are exact rules on the CTU and FEE side, but use of logotypes to distinguish work done by the CTU is one of main intentions of the logos, so forbidding this use does not make sense. It could be liited only to binaries built and distributed by CTU. This was a base of long term unease to distribute Firefox in the Debian distribution. The Debian has been forced to de-brand Firefox when built by them and chosen name Iceweasel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian%E2%80%93Mozilla_trademark_dispute

[JakubVanek]

Thank you! I didn't know that GPLv3 supported this type of exceptions. I will think this through.