@Inginsub @mint The 2 emails are unrelated.

He's clearly pointing out that the requirement is incompatible with the GPLv3 and AGPLv3.

Beyond the compromises about trademarks, changing the AGPLv3 or GPLv3 is unacceptable and should not be tolerated.


The following email is much later and rms likely believed it was in relation to another free license that contains such proprietary word - which wouldn't make such license inherently nonfree.