On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 04:45:19PM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
That would be useful to figure out if the seller even made the effort to recompile GIMP.
There is the concept of GIMP and its logo as marks. Its license is the
GNU GPL. While this means that another project can imitate it, copy the
software, etc., it is not reasonable for a different project to
masquerade as GIMP. GIMP has an identity among the general public (good
or bad), and if another project uses it by misrepresenting itself as
GIMP, it may hurt the GIMP project.
Some forks called their projects CinePaint, Seashore, etc. which are
safer names and clearly differentiate themselves from GIMP. GIMPshop is
in a grey area.
There are also provisions in the GPL for withholding trademark rights,
and in a more lighter sense, avoiding misrepresentation. This can form a
basis for going after shady sellers.
*Note that I don't think any developers want to stop GIMP forks that
create positive derivatives (GIMPshop included), or interfere with
distributions packaging GIMP.
Mukund
Attachment:
pgpaJ67eraaSC.pgp
Description: PGP signature