Generic to state: Licensing under the Apache-license is nothing to worry about. The Apache-trademark is the point in criticism and therefore problem for the Apache-projects. So Hyperbola is no longer packaging any project resulting from the Apache-project itself: https://projects.apache.org/projects.html
]]>https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic … 7935#p7935
and
https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks … ginal-name
text about non-free trademarks.
I see the openclonk-8.1 game has an Apache License in it's licenses folder.
Does it need Apache and it's new trademark policy to build the game.
Though maybe the Apache parts are only used for online multiplayer parts and can be removed, and the game could still be built, as this game could also be played without online multiplayer.
Or those parts could be replaced.
I did not play the game much, other than to test it, as it may have had a lot of fantasy, I think, and I would than wish to edit out the fantasy or explain it under a more scientific explanation, but I could at least edit it out, unless trademarks or other things will not let me build/run it now.
It also has a Trademark file that shows
'Clonk' is a registered trademark of Matthes Bender. It may be used within
software products which are using source code or game content as made public
on the Clonk website (or derived from such) with the following limitations:If the word 'Clonk' is used as the name of anything in your software product
then you must include the following notice in a suitable place (e.g. credits
screen): 'Clonk' is a registered trademark of Matthes Bender.If the title of your software product contains the word 'Clonk' then you must
PREFIX the word with an added name of your choosing, e.g. 'MyClonk' or
'PortableClonk' and you must include the trademark notice above in a suitable
place (e.g. credits screen or splash screen).If you are making your source code or game content available to other parties
in a way which allows adaptation you must include a copy of this license along
with any other applicable licenses.
But this may not yet be like the Apache trademark. Though with a PREFIX needed, or a policy change, it may be. If a trademark policy change is even legal, though I think some trademark holders at this time think it is, as policy changes have been made to Apache as well as some other things.
I hope reporting or typing about this in the forum is helpful. I can try to find a better place if it is not.
]]>