On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Guy Steven wrote:
> Somehow I think people are getting a bit precious over this. I am going to
> side with RedHat.
>
> Redhat admit that they have no problem in people distributing the software.
> What they object to is people distributing software and calling it RedHat.
> For all they know, the cd's distributed under the name RedHat may have
> content that differs from the official RedHat distributions. Someone could
> download Redhat 9, make some minor changes and redistribute it, still under
> the name RedHat. The resultant distribution may be a load of sh#t. (this is
> not an invitation for people to say that the orignial rh 9 is anyway).
> Redhat have a legitimate right to control what software is distributed under
> their name.
>
Of course they have the right to control their trademarks, but there are
different ways of doing this, e.g. Debian's Official CDs.
IMHO, RH is in the process of repositioning itself in the market as a
corporate supplier of GNU/Linux and part of this is shedding the previous
image of being a geek/hobbist/small-fry/amateur distribution. I have no
problem with this as a GNU/Linux advocate, in fact I see it as a good
thing. The corporate world would take RH more seriously and be more
likely to adopt it. Suits and all that. I would also expect RH to
continue and probably increase its contribution to Free Software.
But as a vendor it creates problems, and the tone of the letter I received
was such as to get under my skin.
Phil.
--
Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand
+64 3 488 2818 Fax +64 3 488 2875 Mobile 025 267 9420
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - preferred. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I sell GNU/Linux & GNU/Hurd CDs. See http://www.copyleft.co.nz
