Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Matthew Gillen wrote: > Kristian Erik Hermansen wrote: >> ... So, was that illegal? Yar' gonna walk the plank, matey. Arrr! > .... At the same time, software licensing isn't the only issue, there > are also trademark issues. > > Probably the most compelling evidence that you did do something that > could be considered trademark infringement is to look at what CentOS > has to do in order to redistribute what is for all intents and > purposes redhat enterprise linux: they have to strip out all the > Redhat artwork, all mention of redhat (including in package names). > They can't even mention redhat on their website (they say "a prominent > north American vendor"). > > Again, Apache is a great example, because it's a single piece of > software with a strong brand to protect, and their license is far less > restrictive than the GPL.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |