Conflict info in the legal page v.s. the license

[samphan]

Regarding the Zimbra logo, there seem to be a conflict in the information from the legal page versus the Zimbra license. What do you think?

Zimbra - Trademark and Copyright Policy

Zimbra - Trademark and Copyright Policy

Open source licenses do not include a license to trademarks, and so for you to produce a derivative work of or a collective work including the Zimbra software for distribution consistent with trademark law, you must remove all occurrences of the Zimbra trademark and the Zimbra logo that are visible to users so that nobody can be confused that VMware, Inc. is the source or origin of your derivative or collective works.

Zimbra - Zimbra Public License, Version 1.3 (ZPL)

Zimbra - Zimbra Public License, Version 1.3 (ZPL)

In any copy of the Software or in any Modification you create, You must retain and reproduce, any and all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices that are included in the Software in the same form as they appear in the Software. This includes the preservation of attribution notices in the form of trademarks or logos that exist within a user interface of the Software

[samphan]

anyone has any idea?

[phoenix]

The answer to this question is all over the forums and in the wiki, you may not remove the Zimbra logo from the Open Source version of Zimbra.

[samphan]

Yes. I saw all that. But according to the pages mentioned above, it's impossible to satisfy both agreements at the same time.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by samphan

Yes. I saw all that. But according to the pages mentioned above, it's impossible to satisfy both agreements at the same time.

The problem is, you're quoting two different licenses for two different circumstances and the 'Trademark...' you've quoted is not the current EULA.

If you are installing Zimbra Open Source then you need to follow the current EULA and if you are developing a derivative product then you need to follow the Open Source licence. Go to the search bar at the top of this page and search on the word "license"

[jonallport]

I think the confusion is where the limit is between 'modification' and 'derivative work'. The way I read that is that:

A) If you customise your FOSS implementation of Zimbra you must retain the branding
B) If you 'fork' the code, it is no longer a VMWare product and you cannot pass it off as such

Thats the way I read it anyway. But I'm no lawyer...

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by jonallport

I think the confusion is where the limit is between 'modification' and 'derivative work'. The way I read that is that:

A) If you customise your FOSS implementation of Zimbra you must retain the branding
B) If you 'fork' the code, it is no longer a VMWare product and you cannot pass it off as such

Thats the way I read it anyway. But I'm no lawyer...

You're correct in your interpretation. There should be no confusion, a derivative work uses a different licence than a user installing Zimbra from the binaries and wanting to change the logo etc. - I don't see any confusion in the details of each of those licences.