4) The reason why they did it is actually completely irrelevant. "I killed him because he slept with my wife" doesn't change the fact that you committed murder.
Doesn't GPL have to say something about this? Wouldn't this mean that the adware would need to be open sourced?
Edit: The difference between murder and manslaughter has now been explained, multiple, multiple times. Manslaughter is still a crime and in that way it is still the same. The comparison was used as a device to elaborate why the reasoning was unimportant, the difference between murder and manslaughter isn't important within that context. Suffice to say, now that I have been corrected repeatedly over this nonsense, this would have been a better anecdote:
> "I killed him because he slept with my wife" doesn't change the fact that you killed someone.
There's no need to assume. I searched the US trademark database. There was a registration for GIMP in 2001, number 78084356 ("computer programs for creating and manipulating graphic images on a computer. FIRST USE: 19990600. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19990600"), but it's abandoned since June 7, 2002. There are no other relevant registrations that I can find.
As far as I can tell, there's no formal "GIMP organization".
True, although http://www.gimp.org/donating/ states that "The GNOME Foundation has graciously agreed to act as fiscal agents for us." Maybe they could hold the GIMP trademark?
By the way, the trademark you mention was Caughron, Mathew K. INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES, who seems to have been responsible for the old WinGIMP and MacGIMP distributions that cost money.
The main way I know of would be through trademark infringement. That's why there's GNU IceCat/IceWeasel - Firefox contains trademarked material. I believe Mozilla uses trademark precisely to prevent third-parties from including user-unfriendly components in "Firefox".
"By sending or transmitting to us Content, or by posting such Content to any area of the Sites, you grant us and our designees a worldwide, non-exclusive, sub-licensable (through multiple tiers), assignable, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right to link to, reproduce, distribute (through multiple tiers), adapt, create derivative works of, publicly perform, publicly display, digitally perform or otherwise use such Content in any media now known or hereafter developed. You hereby grant the Company permission to display your logo, trademarks and company name on the Sites and in press and other public releases or filings. Further, by submitting Content to the Company, you acknowledge that you have the authority to grant such rights to the Company. PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF ANY COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS AND SERVICE MARKS IN ANY CONTENT YOU SUBMIT."
And this is relevant because ... why? There's no trademark or service mark, and as we've already discussed, the GIMP copyright allows this sort of use.
The permission clause is "You hereby grant the Company permission to display your logo, trademarks and company name on the Sites and in press and other public releases or filings."
This does not appear to include the right to use the trademark in installers, as an installer is neither a site nor press release, etc.
>4) The reason why they did it is actually completely irrelevant. "I killed him because he slept with my wife" doesn't change the fact that you committed murder.
Hate, well, love to be pedantic, but it actually it does matter.
Courts and society alike take the reason for a murder (e.g. self-defense, revenge because of having been abused, being crazy or intoxicated etc.) into consideration for less harsh sentences or even acquital.
Self defense maybe, though good luck, but the rest won't help you any of you get into that much trouble. especially intoxication, you certainly can't use that as your defense for murder.
(not totally relevant but) technically that would be a crime of passion murder, and in some cases would result in a charge of "Voluntary Manslaughter" rather than "First Degree Murder". [1] Reason does matter, sometimes. Although in this case, Sourceforge just needs to stop.
Self defense, manslaughter, second degree, first degree...
Intent and reason is quite important. It is the difference between receiving no punishment and receiving the death penalty (in places that still have it).
Notwithstanding that the intricate technicalities of killing someone was what I was going for at all, how did you miss the two other comments that repeated this information nearly an hour before yours?
I get it. The anecdote had technical issues. Not-with-standing that being technically correct is not what anecdotes are about in the first place.
>how did you miss the two other comments that repeated this information nearly an hour before yours?
Honestly. I respond as I read. I tend not to keep reading and then go back to respond.
>Not-with-standing that being technically correct is not what anecdotes are about in the first place.
This is more than a mere technicality. The whole issue of mens rea is that one's state of mind is a factor is how someone is judged for their actions.
Your point, even without the analogy issue, is that the reason is irrelevant. That is simply not the case. Putting a security flaw in place to give the FBI a backdoor is vastly different than putting a security flaw in place due to poor coding. You may say they are both the same in that they both compromised security, but only one of these is backdooring and the damage to one's reputation is going to be different.
Now, in this particular case, the reason isn't sufficient to warrant a different judgment. But that is because of the details of this case.
Doesn't GPL have to say something about this? Wouldn't this mean that the adware would need to be open sourced?
Edit: The difference between murder and manslaughter has now been explained, multiple, multiple times. Manslaughter is still a crime and in that way it is still the same. The comparison was used as a device to elaborate why the reasoning was unimportant, the difference between murder and manslaughter isn't important within that context. Suffice to say, now that I have been corrected repeatedly over this nonsense, this would have been a better anecdote:
> "I killed him because he slept with my wife" doesn't change the fact that you killed someone.