[aur-general] Basilisk pkgbuild is facing a trademark violation?

Morgan Adamiec morganamilo at gmail.com
Tue May 22 04:43:12 UTC 2018

On 22 May 2018 at 05:37, Doug Newgard via aur-general
<aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2018 23:17:39 -0400
> Eli Schwartz via aur-general <aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
>> All this being said:
>> [11:07:23 PM] <MoonchildPM|Away> eschwartz: if you plan to go that
>> route, that's fine and someone can have a look over your build
>> configuration (which I could do as well if it is was not 5 in the
>> morning) and can tell you what's wrong with it. In the interim, until
>> permission is granted, you are NOT allowed to keep these packages up
>> since you're in violation. You ask permission first, get it granted
>> first, THEN are allowed to use it if OK, not in any other order
> What these jokers don't seem to get is that there is NO packages involved here.
> There is nothing here that violates the license as there is no redistribution
> at all. Moot point, move on and whine somewhere else.

They seem to acknowledge  it with:
>[10:43:49 PM] <KlipKyle> eschwartz: you are distributing build scripts,
>like Gentoo ebuilds except less automation.  The same rules apply.

What they seem to be against is the use of the name, which the pkgname
variable does contain. And the upstream URL too I guess? If you can
even claim trademark violation over a URL.

More information about the aur-general mailing list