On 17 Dec 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > "Leonard den Ottolander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Cheapbytes currently announces the FTP version as: > > > > Looking for CDs containing the downloadable > > version of the XXX XXX Linux distribution? > > > > Hint: The name has to do with an article of clothing > > to keep your head warm. > > How can have I missed this information in their section Hot New > product? Now it is clear. This trademark enforcement is new. > This is why I was unaware ... > does this protection of the name extend to anyone who wants to, say, write a book on red hat administration, or a course? consider microsoft windows. apparently, every man and his dog seems to write a book on how to use the latest version of windows as soon as it's released. do all of these authors have to get permission to do this? that seems unreasonable. if i wanted to write a book on how to repair ford mustangs, would i first have to get permission from ford motor company? would they have the right to prevent me from writing such a book because "ford mustang" is a trademark?
frankly, i don't see how red hat can prevent someone like cheapbytes from selling a distribution of linux entitled "an unsupported but exact copy of red hat 7.2". they wouldn't be claiming it's red hat 7.2, just something bit-for-bit identical to it on the physical CD. i fail to see how this would constitute a violation of red hat's trademark. rday _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
