[KLUG Members] Fwd: I was wondering when this would come to a point ...

[Bryan-TheBS-Smith]

Bruce & co might be interested in this as well ...

-------- Original Message --------
From: Bryan-TheBS-Smith <b.j.smith@ieee.org>
Subject: I was wondering when this would come to a point ...

RedHat is starting to make some legal moves on behalf of it's
trademarked name.

It was obvious to me that as Linux gained popularity, it would move more
and more into the hands of the non-realist users.  It doesn't surprise
me now that some clueless people who buy $2 RedHat CDs from indepedent
Internet CD distributors are expecting support.  Especially when some
distributors repackage RedHat differently, or in a way that may not
match the original CD releases put out by RedHat.  Again, some people
are just clueless, and always go looking for a brand name to blame,
which finally leads companies into trying to address it. **

So what does RedHat do?

Well, as with every company, no matter how good or bad, the lawyers get
involved and usually exploit the opportunity to the extent the law
allows.  Some have even received cease and desist letters from RedHat's
lawyers, orders that forbid them from mentioning RedHat's name at all on
their CDs, and many are scratching their heads.  It's obvious that
RedHat one of the biggest GPL software generating firms in the industry,
and maintain a 100% GPL core product line (_unlike_many_ distributors
who don't offer a 100% GPL version in an easy to download/burn ISO
image).  But RedHat definately has a legal and marketing arm that easily
matches Microsoft on a PR-level.

I think this is quite easily solved with a little tact.

If the laywers at RedHat want to start getting "anal" about people using
the RedHat name, I'm sure Linus will remind RedHat that Linux(R) is also
a registered trademark that they gain free use of.  From there, we'll
probably see some "reining of the laywers" with RedHat's management and
the Linux community finally deciding what is best.  I would not be
surprised if this finally ends in a compromise where the distributors
are allowed to continue referencing RedHat, possibly in an "indirect"
way (like "RHLinux version (blah)"), but must include a disclaimer both
in print on the CD label side as well as in the README (as well as other
files, possibly the installer) that this is not a RedHat Linux release
nor is it supported by RedHat.

But it won't surprise me to see some of the more "vocal" Linux bigots
among us throw their weight around in a temper tantrum before all is
said and done.  ;-PPP

Story:
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=01/12/10/2014239&mode=thread

As always, just my $0.02 ...

-- The "that's why I always called my modified CDs 'ReHack'" BS

** NOTE:  For those of you that wonder why us "traditional engineers"
get so "anal" about "vendor technicians" presenting themselves as
"certified engineers," this is a perfect example.  It's not us being
"overzealous" or "anal," but it is an action that is preceded by public
confusion.  When the state Board of Professional Engineers starts
getting complaints from consumers about malpracticing MSCE and CNE
consultants, that's a good sign that the issue needs to be addressed. 
Again, people try to be understanding, but only to a point.  And that
point is where public/market confusion forces the company/organization
to have to address it.

-- 
Bryan "TheBS" Smith    mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org   chat:thebs413
Engineer  AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc.  http://www.linux-wlan.org
President    SmithConcepts, Inc.    http://www.SmithConcepts.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
"in a situation where you have someone against you ... an ac-
 cusation ... can lead to time in jail.  This fear can be more
 effective in controlling a group of people than the enforcement
 of the law as is. -- Joao Miguel Neves on the US DMCA and EU CD