Thu Dec 13 11:59:56 PST 2001
On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, Rick Moen wrote:
> They can _claim_ that. Here's some prototype ad copy:
> Uncle Pete's Linux Distribution
> We took all the packages in Red Hat Software(R)'s Red Hat Linux(R)
> v. 7.2 as our point of departure, replaced wu-ftpd with vs-ftpd,
> sendmail with exim, yanked out Netscape Navigator/Communicator as
> superfluous in this day and age, replaced pico with nano and an
> appropriate symlink, and replaced pine with a script that runs mutt
> with Pine.rc to emulate the pine keybindings. All yours for $nn.nn
> with a nice, friendly copy of _Running Linux_ 3rd edition -- and it's
> better _and_ cheaper than those other guys. Oh, and _our_ default
> kernel doesn't choke on AIC7896 chipsets, either.
I think in this case it goes back to what a "reasonable person" would
assume. I think it's pretty clear from the copy that you are not endorsed
by Red Hat nor is it official Red Hat Linux.
It's different than saying:
Uncle Pete's Linux Distribution
Red Hat Linux has been improved through the replacement of many
legacy applications like wu-ftpd, Netscape and sendmail with new
and improved programs. In addition, we've reconfigured the default
behaviour of many applications so that they're more efficient.
We've also included a newer, more stable kernel...
They can invoke trademark violations as they damn well please, but it's
likely the average judge would throw them out of the court room if they
challenged your copy. My copy would probably end up costing me a lot of
Derek Vadala, firstname.lastname@example.org, http://www.cynicism.com/~derek
More information about the linux-elitists