Re: Pirating Ubuntu?

["Jarod Wilson" <user=74@nabble.blu.org>]

 On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 01:36 -0400, randy cole wrote: 
> Matthew Gillen wrote: 
> > Kristian Erik Hermansen wrote: 
> >  .... 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. 
> *snip* 
> > What they are worried about is you making your own "spin" of Apache 
> > that adds all sorts of security holes and poor performance, and having 
> > the world know your software as "Apache" (thereby tarnishing their 
> > good name).  So you can derive your own works, but you have to call it 
> > something else.  That's exactly why CentOS isn't called FreeRHEL.   
> > Redhat can't have their reputation in the hands of someone else (i.e. 
> > the people distributing CentOS). 
> > 
> > Does all that mean that you did in fact infringe on their trademark? 
> > Depends if your 'rip' was bit-for-bit faithful recreation. If it 
> > wasn't bit-for-bit then it is obviously trademark infringement.  If it 
> > was bit-for-bit, then it (probably) wasn't trademark infringement, but 
> > you may have violated some other part of the license (here I'm 
> > thinking about access to update servers as a value-added service that 
> > they may have a clause in their license restricting access to people 
> > who bought the software from RH or some such). 
> > 
> At Fudcon 2008 Boston last month, the head of Fedora said they are 
> **thinking about** loosening some of the restrictions on Fedora 
> licensing to make it easier to distribute customized versions but still 
> protect the Fedora trademark.