On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Orna Agmon wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Haim Ravia wrote:
>
> > Read the Red Hat FAQs.
> >
>
> /me is reading the FAQ.
>
> There is nothing unclear about this: The updates CD is not the problem: it
> is the three RH cds. We, in this case hamakor, which is the legal body, is
> selling CDs, and getting money. It does not matter that we get little
> money for it. We are re-distributing RH, with their trademark, which is
> what is important here. The code is here to redistribute. But they do not
> let us re-distribute the RED HAT ITSELF.
>
> So we can:
>
> 1. replace the red hats (e.g. pink tie linux, or ourselves)
> In this case, the updates CD will be fine as it is.
OK, how?
we have 300 Redhat CDs, they have the redhat name on logo both
on the outside and in the software on them. Throwing them out
seems like a bad idea.
What did Actcom do with Mandrake? they burned there own Mandrake CDs
didn't they? and last year with the redhat CDs? did we break the law then
as well? we sold Redhat CDs with the redhat name printed on them and
on the software inside.
I am trying to think more of what is right then what is legal(mainly
because I know very little about legal), It is wrong to take credit for
other peoples work, and it is wrong to claim something is someone elses
work when it isn't. I think if we make it clear what we did, we should be
in the right. However if someone has a practical plan for being legal as
well I am listening.
Meir.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haifa Linux Club Mailing List (http://www.haifux.org)
To unsub send an empty message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
