Red Hat 7.2 B2 comments (rant)

[mbrodeur at NextTime.com (Matthew J. Brodeur)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 3 Sep 2002, K. Ari Krupnikov wrote:

> Err, IANALE, but isn't it infringement to use another's trademark in
> your product's name? Like Red Hat *Linux*?

   Only without the permission of the trademark owner.  From an old post 
by Linus to the kernel-dev list:

   "I'm required to ask people to acknowledge the trademark. When you use 
the term "Linux" in official marketing literature etc, you should 
acknowledge it as a trademark owned by me.
   "If your intent is to use the word "linux" as part of a real Linux 
project, that doesn't mean that you automatically absolutely have to get 
permission from me. That's the LAST thing I want. I want "Linux" to be as 
free as possible as a term, and the real reason for having a trademark in 
the first place was to _protect_ it rather than use it as some kind of 
legalistic enforcement thing.
   "Being "specific" is _good_.
   "...something like "VA Linux" or "Red Hat Linux" oviously isn't a 
generic term: it's a very _targeted_ term for something very specific. 
Those kinds of names do not detract from other peoples ability to call 
_their_ Linux company something else."

 
> So if you are right, every single distribution that has "Linux" in its 
> name is infringing as it is.

   For the record, AFAIK Red Hat(r) does not have a trademark on "Red Hat 
Linux".  In fact, in print (on their web site at least) it is written as 
"Red Hat(r) Linux(r)", acknowledging the fact that they have registered 
"Red Hat", and "Linux" belongs to Linus.  This may be considered a 
"combination mark" but I can find no indication of such on Red Hat's 
trademark page.  Actually, they do claim an unregistered mark on "Official 
Red Hat Linux (tm)".



References:
Linus's post to Linux-dev (Slashdot):
http://slashdot.org/articles/00/01/19/0828245.shtml
Red Hat Trademark Guidelines:
http://www.redhat.com/about/corporate/trademark/guidelines.html

- -- 
     -Matt

I try not to break the rules but merely to test their elasticity.
		-- Bill Veeck

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9dOTXc8/WFSz+GKMRAuQIAKCWHL70T03CojjFH6LGEHz014f/0QCfXCPI
l21Nmhf9DCodhxMu83/1CjE=
=zELV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----