Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Tightening Trademarks?
Sands says that, according to Amazon.com, Red Hat no longer allows their trademarked "Red Hat" name to be used on any product other than their official boxed "Red Hat Linux" sets.
Amazon.com spokesperson Sharon Greenspan says, "Right now we're looking into a possible Intellectual Property violation involving Red Hat Linux software. We are talking to Red Hat and the sellers of such products." Sharon says she'll call Slashdot as soon as knows more; she seemed as surprised by this news as was everyone else.
A well-known Linux products vendor has confirmed to me personally, off the record, that yes, Red Hat is trying to keep outsiders from using the "Red Hat" name when selling anything other than official Red Hat boxed sets, and that Red Hat no longer wants their trademark used on GPLed or repackaged versions or their products.
Red Hat itself cannot comment on this story at this time. They are in a legally mandated "quiet period" following their recent IPO, which does not end until September 6th. Meanwhile, if you have more information about this matter, please psot it below or e-mail me privately: roblimo@nOsPaMslashdot.rg
Red Hat & Mandrake are already diverging.
6.0 had a different kernel and a different bash at least. I saw an interview w/Mandrake's creator where he talked about this.
6.1b (available on ftp sites now) has even more apps added (including Xemacs 21) and more desktop tweaks.
Mandrake also has their own development/unstable version now that anyone can download, called cooker. It's kinda like Red Hat's Rawhide or Debian unstable.
Mandrakesoft's intention has always been to become it's own independent distribution. The fact that early releases were *heavily* based on Red Hat and that they make Red Hat compatibility one of their priorities appears to be creating some marketing problems for them.
Looking at Amazon.com linux auctions when I found this one from a familiar source. Is that CmdrTaco's GF??
title says it all...newbies will be fooled.
Goto eBay.com and check my 2000 positive feedbacks. I've had the infrastructure to do it for a year with 99+% positive responses from customers.
The proof is in the pudding, and the feedback speaks for itself. Doubt all you want but a years worth of history shows the product and the service are loved by customers.
Robb
(WTF does putting my name at the bottom do? Nothing)
Using your few brain calories ponder this:
My amazon feedback rating is almost 100% positive just like eBay.
There are NO COMPLAINTS about the RedHat product being defective or the support being slighted. So Guess AGAIN Sherlock.
Try another 'Logical' Guess....
Since you have a copy of the official and the sands distribution, maybe you can tell us exactly what the differences are.
Oh, wait, you don't have both distributions and are just making a Wild A$$ed Guess. Try starting with facts then making statements instead of ready, shoot mouth off, aim....
Yeah, and why do you think that is? How many people work at MS vs Redhat? How much money does MS have? How much do they charge for all their products? Well if you've answered those questions, then you'll see why people get tired of forking over tons of dough and still getting tons of bugs.
Goto amazon.com or ebay.com and look at my feedback. I support what I sell. I only sell as much as I can support and vice versa. Nothing hard to figure out there... I don't want all of RH's customers, just my own...
'My' webserver is located at reliantwebhosting and yes they run NT - OH MY GOD.
I have several boxes at home and run Caldera 2.2, not RedHat - take that for what it's worth.
This still doesn't prove RH was involved. Amazon is making the call to protect the integrity of their auctions. And would you also quit fucking posting this letter?!!!
Votre porc a mangé mon pardessus.
Your post makes you sound very immature. You jump ship because Amazon cracks down on their auctions? I'm sure it's because they've gotten a ton of complaints about this guy Sands misrepresenting himself. I have no probs if you want to jump ship because of something RH did, or because of the distro itself, and that's the beauty of multiple distros. However, I wouldn't be overjoyed if I was Mandrake...who knows how long it would be before you jump ship again...
The end is here.
.RPM infest my soul.
We *_KNEW_* this kind of thing would happen.
You were all warned.
The Prophets of OS have been convulsing with the visions for some time now.
The signs and portents were clear.
And lo, the Great HAT rose from the sweat of the common hacker, and it grew RED with their life's blood.
And lower, The Munged IPO did show their true intent.
All this time, the natty old prophets were crying "The END the END."
And lowest, the hordes did not listen...
And many were caught unprepared.
I was prepared.
I cast off the Hat some time ago, and live rightously, as a hermit, bereft of pre-compiled i386 binaries, which are tainted by the greed that has colored that Hat so Red.
No more does the Mark of The Beast, the dreaded
I have purified my system with pristine source.
I have Made my Own World.
I am ready.
*GRIN*
On another note, based on the fact that you run your webserver on Windows, you must be running a pyramid support scheme where you pass on your support questions to RH. If that's the case, that's very low.
Also, "The distribution formely known as RedHat" Linux
From his comments (and the repeated posting of the email that he says comes from Amazon.com), I'd have to assume that most of the comments by Anonymous Coward are really from Robb Sands himself.
If he really cared about this, he'd at least get Slashdot ID so we'd know when it was actually his comments.
Jeff
Hey, isn't this the chick that was walking around the first LinuxWorld Expo in translucent clothing? Spent a lot of time hanging around the Slashdot booth, as I recall...
Call it Brightly Colored Head Wear. :-)
There's more here, but I believe that's sufficient to show that (A) RH has NOT metamorphosed into some kind of mini-M$; and (B) this Sands guy is a scammer AND a whiner, to boot.
--Zontar The Mindless (password's @ home, I'm not).
aaawwwwwwww, poor baby
- Blue Shoes Linux
- Chartruse Sandals Linux
- Periwinkle Polyester Pants Linux
- Brown Belt Linux
- Black Belt Linux ( Should this be for hardcore hackers only? )
- Tangerine Tutu Linux (It would only run on a Tangerine iBook)
- Bodini Blue Boot Linux (Requires a blueberry iMac or iBook)
Perhaps we should require the VA to match the computer case color to the color of the distribution.Just think of the fun we could have. Besides I think red hats look rather tacky.
so much for truly free software, eh?
Sounds to me like you are interested in a little market fluctuation - get stock to drop to your desired amount, buy some for a quick profit again!
whatever. the LSB needs to get the hell out of the business of dictating package formats (RPM? no.), init script layouts (SysVR4? no thanks.), etc.
Actually, what they provide is a brand name, a decent installation and 90 days of tech support which consists of "read the faq, go away" Their support is useless.
Why is it that all these goofs can't understand for one that the initiator of this action appears to be Amazon and secondly that this is in the best interest of Amazon's customers to protect them from being defrauded.
Let me remind everyone that Linux(tm) is a trademark owned by Linus Torvalds and I am very sure that he or the Linux community itself would protect the trademarked Linux name from
fraudulent and miselading usage.
A scenario comes to mind where someone modifies the Linux kernel by adding proprietary features, refuses to release the modified source and then peddles the result as a Linux(tm) kernel.
What do you think will happen?
Linus and the Linux community would be within their rights to protect the Linux name.
RedHat also has this right, so quit whining about RedHat and their Microsoft like ways. RedHat is not Microsoft, not in any aspect at all.
They are however the most conspicuous commercial Linux distribution in the USA and have raised awareness of the RedHat "brand name" through hard work, service, support and contributions to the Linux community.
Martin Imrisek
mimrisek@go-dsp.com
Let RedHat inforce trademark just like you would have Linus do.
..
This is a scam for sure, designed to take advantage of people who new to Linux.
1. It says "...lifetime support". People are going to think they get support from RedHat. Even just a call to RH to ask for help costs the customer on the same order of $ as the CD, not to mention what it costs RH.
2. It is not clear it's RH GPL (or SuSE GPL, for that matter) at all unless you look at one of the linked pages.
3. It's not clear who you are dealing with unless you look at one of the linked pages. People will think he is a RH/SuSE retailer. He's not.
This is a clear violation of the RedHat trademark, and SuSE as well. This sort of thing only gives Linux a bad name through shoddy quality (see below). Trademark dilution is to be avoided at all cost (because otherwise you loose your trademark!).
Still not convinced? This is no Linux company.
telnet bestlinux.tf
Trying 209.90.158.216...
Connected to bestlinux.tf.
Escape character is '^]'.
Welcome to Seattle Lab RemoteNT Version 1.2 on EASERVER.
logon:
Oh, but wait! Can you be sure all the files are in tact, right permission, no names mangled? Here's his list of files _copied from the linked web pages at the right_
Volume in drive E is 980919_0848
Volume Serial Number is 2C09-B892
Directory of E:\
12:30p .
12:30p
03:32p 146,858 aboot-0.5-2.src.rpm
03:33p 846,867 acm-4.7-7.src.rpm
03:33p 27,489 adjtimex-1.3-3.src.rpm
03:33p 2,007,779 AfterStep-1.4.5.3-2.src.rpm
03:33p 1,609,673 am-utils-6.0a16-1.src.rpm
03:33p 2,926 anonftp-2.5-1.src.rpm
03:33p 289,671 AnotherLevel-0.6.8-2.src.rpm
A good bet is he's never installed the thing (since he can't be bothered to list the files in Linux) and he's knows nothing about it. Just bought the CD, copied it with whatever came with his WinNT to gold disk and sent it off to be pressed.
You've never seen RH go after CheapBytes or LinuxMall have you? All you "What's next? Making money?" people just go away.
Thanks RH and Amazon, for making sure you are going to have property (trademark, brand, etc) to keep your company healthy with.
D. Jeff Dionne
Great, now we've agreed that Amazon has asked that infringement on Red Hat's name be stopped via auctionkill.
Can we use a few brain calories for a minute? Why on earth would Amazon pick one product out of 100,000 and suddenly begin calling and emailing sellers to stop selling it? I've been selling for a year and seen this with other sellers and products - and there's only one logical answer - because the vendor asked them to enforce it. They told me this on the phone, and that should be good enough. Just use a little common sense on this and ask yourself why this might happen.
How much proof exists that RedHat Legal called Amazon Legal and asked them to enforce this? Phone records between the two phone #'s, not much else. Since I don't work for the phone company I can't very well be generating the proof you so desire.
Just think about this and I'm sure you'll find the only reasonable explanation will come to you - I have faith.
I have been in business supporting customers for 1 year with almost perfect auction site feedback, just check it. My customers are pleased after the sale with the value and the service. Yes I do know the difference between Mandrake and SuSE well enough to support new users through their install. I DONT CHARGE THEM A DIME for ongoing support, so wake up.
I do not sell off my website, did you see a price or a place to order the 2 CD Set? I sell at auctions, try viewing my auction ads on amazon or ebay. They clearly state whether it is official boxed set or not, what you get and what it costs.
Bestlinux is my hosting service, since my isp doesn't let me have the 200mb I need. Yes, they run NT, oh my God, it's a microshaft conspiracy!
I only broke the story because Amazon was enforcing a trademark which has been given to the linux community for 5 YEARS! Yes this would affect cheapbits, lsl, linuxmall, and all the big dogs, not just moi. This issue is a little bigger than just one guy - that is why the story broke.
Seems the biggest idiots are the loudest around here. "This sucks" "Red Hat Better Watch it" etc... I've taken to sorting by score, sorting by age of post is useless. Compare the two, you will see that the loudest most ill informed flame first. The more informitive posts are almost always last...
Red Hat is brand name. If your software doesn't come from Red Hat, it shouldn't be called Red Hat. If company XYZ decides to download the distro from the RH site and redistribute it, then then it should be labeled XYZ not Red Hat and their customers should go to XYZ for support not Red Hat.
It isn't such a big deal if they say that their distro is based on Red Hat but use a different brand name, like Mandrake and Workgroup Solutions did. But I don't think you should be able to claim it is "Red Hat Linux" unless it comes straight from Red Hat.
Yes I'm robb, the site is currently up so I'm not sure why you're having troubles. I am not accepting sales as a result of this story. I didn't break the story to make money, only to keep my meager business alive. I have auctions on ebay for 3.99, 2 cd set. Just search for linux powertools and you'll find it. If you choose to bid on my stuff and other peoples, great, but I am not soliciting added sales.
nuff said. I don't dig dead chicks.
To Robert Young...you have come a long way since Mother's Day, eh? Remember your roots! Without the support of Open Source developers you had nothing...
I suspect that many of us whose names are contained in the kernel and/or userland credits of every "boxed set" you sell... find your trademark position ill advised, even offensive. Sell services if you like, but do not hold our work hostage.
Red Hat has taken our work, placed it in a box with Red Hat's on it, and now Red Hat asks for money else a trademark is violated? Whats next, a distribution copyright?! Bah!
This flies in the face of the open source culture many have worked so diligently to achieve. We must remember that absolute power corrupts absolutely...all commercial ventures suffer are tempted.
Which will be the last to succumb to the color of money? Debian? One of the BSDs?
Wanted: a new development home with long term vision, resistant to predatory greed wrought by profit motive, uncompromised moral standards manifest by always "doing the right thing" especially when faced with extreme political and social pressure, preferably located beyond the reach of silly USA regulators.
Suggestions anyone?
Are you sure it's Mr. Sands who is being cut off at the knees? Sounds more like it's Linux to me. Maybe Linus should do the same thing to them, tell Bob Young that he can no longer use the term Linux (tm) on his boxen. RedHat's greed is quickly separating it from the rest of the Linux community. If you took advantage of "the letter" to score some green on the IPO, sell now.
The problem is that you treat the URL like some sort of bonus or special prize...and that reeks of cheap salesmanship. A freely available URL is no bonus at all...I'm not calling into question your value added selling of linux since I don't have enough info, but the quality of your salesmanship and the crap on your website seems to suggest a lot of what you are about. Incidentally, feedback on ebay mostly reflects a completed transaction, rarely does it reflect ongoing support. One would have to email those people to verify your 'level of support'.
I like "Pink Fedora" more than "Red Hat", actually.
What is the big deal? RedHat wants to defend their product from others banking on their brandname. It doesn't stop anyone from downloading RH 6 and making their "KumQuat V1 based on RedHat 6" distribution. I have yet to hear ONE reason why RedHat is so evil- or somehow the "Microsoft of Linux". They have done more to bring Linux to where it is today than nearly all the whiners piled together. Plus, they've taken a pretty high road doing so- all their stuff is downloadable and free if you choose to get it that way, or pay if you want to. YOUR CHOICE! I still don't understand what is the big deal over such trivial distinctions as particular distributions. To be sure, different ones offer different orientations, but they are all Linux. And you can always get from point a to point b, given adequate practice. Is the problem that RedHat is too popular, or too sucessful, or maybe not > enough? If so, grow up. Gregm
Well he's right RedCrap...er I mean redhat does suck.. Mark my words, because they went public it is going to change linux for the worse.. Redhat sucks. And if you ask me what distro I use, I'll tell you... My Own...But once upon a time a minimally based on debian...
Pain is an illusion of the senses. Pain is for the weak. Life without pain has no meaning. Use Slackware. Yours faithfully, A Slacker
Yeah. Use your head. They're going for the Wintel crowd, right? And they don't really want to deal with support calls in the line of "I bought this for $2 and I can't get it to work". I wish they had given a two-month warning or something...but even if their handling of the situation is poor, they really did have to do this. I don't blame them.
Just like I have been saying.. Redhat is going to change linux for the worse.. And from your post looks like linux community is starting to segment...
Um...I wouldn't blame M$ for not letting someone label a product "Microsoft Windows". Granted, them going after everyone with "NT" in their name a while ago really ticked me off. But *you're* the one not being fair.
If you haven't sold your redhat stocks by now your a an IDIOT!! RedHat is what is called a pump and dump stock.. Buy in cheap, let it's stock rise on hype then dump it quick! Redhat is a terrible long term investment...Sell before there stock becomes worthless.. I guarentee you they will drop.. Back down to maybe 14-17 bucks a share... Sell sell sell!!!
Well, we could have predicted that it would have happened....and it did. Before long, there'll be "branding", consultants telling them "if you do this, you'll OWN the Linux market", and such. Oh, well....VSTa anyone?
Who cares anyway? Putting a company name on a product that they didn't make would have been crushed long ago if we were talking about anyone but redhat. If I were running a company, and someone took my name, I'd be mad too.
He isn't selling linux.. He is selling his time and effort to put redshit on the cd and the cost of the cd itself. Not redhat..
Redhat makes there money buy selling the "offical" redhat. I don't think it would be fair for somebody else to claim they have offical redhat box sets.Redhat has to make money somehow. Note: I am a debian user.
The really strange part of your site is this URL:
http://www.bestlinux.tf/auctionad/cd4f iles.txt So, your idea of support is to stick the disk in your Windows box, type dir, and post a file list? Mr. Sands, have you ever even booted Linux in your life? I didn't think so.
And pretending to sell support as well.
C'mon people, do you realize that most of the people you're defending here are a bunch of coder wannabees with a RedHat CD and a CDR, and are trying nothing more than to make a quick buck??? I can respect Mandrake, since they give something back. The guys selling rippoff CD's on Amazon are doing absolutely nothing for Linux. Many of them are deliberately trying to confuse new users into thinking they've got the real thing, with support, etc. If you're going to profit off of Red Hat's work, either give something back in the form of software improvements, or give RH some cash to pay people like Alan Cox, etc. Troy@blacklablinux.com (passwords suck)
How about Red Arse Linux?
"Ingram Micro" the "largest computer distributor?" Surely there are much bigger?
AFAIK RedHat HAS to protect their Trademark because if they DON'T then later someone else can actually use it in ways which RedHat would object to and there wouldn't be a damn thing they could do about it....because they knew about its use here and did nothing. They could let us say "RedHat based...RedHat is a trademark of RedHat Inc." or whatever....but allowing the use of the trademark in ways that could be mistaken as them is something they must now be extra careful to avoid or risk loosing the RedHat trademark.
Call it FRed Hat Linux. With the F in FRed printed in a slightly off shade of the blue background.
Have the pimp in the Red Hat on the logo slightly modified. Maybe smoking a cigarette. No, a pipe! No! That would be Bob on Slackware.
It's the Shadow Man logo that's the issue, not the name of the distribution...
Read the disclaimer at bestlinux.tf.
He is claiming to sell a Commercial version of RedHat Linux 5.2, SuSE Linux 5.3 and Caldera OpenLinux 1.3 on single CDs.
So what is this? Seems to be more than just the GPL version of RedHat.
He even claims that ... The only files not on the Standard One CD Set which are included in the 'Official Boxed Set' from RedHat direct are the Alpha, and Sparc files, and a few redundant RPMs. ...
So what is Metro X that is included in the official boexed set? Just a redundant rpm?This definitely is a rippoff and amazon's legal department was completely right.
(not anonymous) Jens jens@sowiciplnx.cip.sowi.uni-bamberg.deThey will be competing with Nike linux
The Slackware distribution is quite nice. Version 3.6 is a good stable release based on the 2.0.34 kernel (easily upgraded to the latest in the 2.0.x series). 4.0 is pretty good too, incorporates the 2.2 kernel, and has optional (not crammed in hastily) Qt and GlibC libraries.
It's the same usual, clean non-do-everything-possible-in-one-huge-menu install it always has been.
Of course, if you like the style of a Slackware distribution, you'll love a NetBSD install.
They're calling the picture of the pimp in a red hat on the logo a "shadowman"?
Shadowman, schmadowman. Red Hat owns the pimp. It's that simple.
Has Slashdot sent in their royalties for having it on the site?
Who wants to get something thats not red hat in error. That would suck. "based on red hat" "using red hat" and the like are in Red Hat's interest. Having someone sell inferior products as if they were red hat is bad
I guess it's not too late to start covertly putting stickers on the RedHat boxes at our favorite retailers.
They would read:
"Don't Buy This Product without logging onto www.cheapbytes.com or www.linuxmall.com first!"
A nice discreet warning label.
Yes.
Only a newbie would be fooled into buying "da box"
"da box" is a common icon featured in the advertising of many software products. It is always a colorful isometric view of the box that the software product purportedly comes in. "da box" is sometimes even featured on ads for products where there's never really such a box containing the product.
The suits and PHB's can only relate to a product that includes "da box" somewhere in it's marketing materials.
Anybody who has run Linux for more than a few months figures out that "da box" is all you get for buying an Official Red Hat. A plain-white-box version from Cheapbytes.com is the upgrade path.
That's it. I'm switching to Mandrake. Everyone sell your RedHat stocks. I don't think I'll be the only one switching to Mandrake. Better, cheaper and NOT RedHat.
You forgot:
"Black Hat"- Trinux.
Another case of Red Hat vs. Microsoft. If Red Hat does something it's okay, yet if Microsoft does it's bad....ppbbthhtttt :-P
but i guess you didn't read the sleeve.
Judging from the way they screw up the default settings in the Makefile for the kernel source on every RPM version I have ever seen (as opposed to the tarball you can download at kernel.org) I would say that kernel hackers at Red Hat should be cut loose from the company.
/etc directory company.
Actually, I say break 'em up. Like we all want Microsoft broken up:
1. A kernel company.
2. A
3. A screwed-up-python-config-script company.
4. And of course the people who put the picture of the pimp in the red hat on "da box"
Microsoft charges about the same as Red Hat.
I mean Red Hat in 'da box' of course.
I think the article is confused, the problem is the shadow man logo...which is and oughta be trademarked and protected as such.
Red Linux is the Communist version. Same distro. only you don't have as many choices during installation. Be careful with the kernel though, it can slow ya down like an iron curtain
I guess it proves who you are to somebody.
Robb
Well I guess we can throw out those 2000 positive customer comments as hogwash and not representative of how people really feel. Pardon me?
Some people wait a month, until the product is installed and running on all cylinders, to post feedback. Don't downplay the only mechanism we have for customer satisfaction - namely FEEDBACK. There are over 2000 positives with less than 1/2 of 1% negative (most of them relate to other sellers stealing ads and posting retaliation feedback). NO ONE HAS CLAIMED POOR SERVICE!!!
I have modified the website to indicate I am freely giving away the office suite url. That is what I've done all along but was not communicated clearly, but I do use it as an enticement to purchase - it is a value added offering. The fact that I loan the office suite CD to people who need it hasn't been discussed, but is another offering to my customers. I'm not making a million bux off of this so don't pretend that I am...
Keep in mind that I do not sell products off my website. Did you see any prices on the Red Hat CD? NO. It is for future opportunities. Look at the auction ad that people view and purchase based on, then complain.
Please feel free to email all 2200 of my satisfied customers and ask them how support has been. Then post and apology and your survey results and a picture of you eating crow!
Robb
You are correct. I had no intention of my name or website getting any mention - but it was added for 'credibility'.
Any press on this issue is good, regardless of what talkback readers responses indicate. I'd rather be the sacrificial lamb and have RedHat backdown due to community pressure than quietly be put out of business, along with cheapbytes, lsl, linuxmall, etc. and have RedHat 'slide' this policy change by as if nothing had happened.
My ONLY intention was to get people out there aware that after 5 years of encouraging (and even giving me written permission) to use the Red Hat name on GPL distributions, they are pulling the rug out from under us - nothing more, nothing less. Yes, I don't like taking the bashing for selling 2 CD sets at 3.99 or 9.99, offering a lifetime support and warranty. People think I'm getting rich - HAH. If only they knew how many gpl sellers have went out of business in the year I've been selling online, they might appreciate just how competitive and low margin it really is.
The official statement from RedHat and Amazon is to appear today according to Red Hat President and Amazon legal - we shall see what they decide then.
If you look at the auction site, you'll see that this guy uses images of the boxed set in his ad.
He is clearly trying to confuse people into thinking they are buying the commercial boxed set, which consumers know comes from RedHat, the company, with support.
Amazon is probably trying to protect itself from claims of fraud.
It would have been better if they had notified the RedHat legal department to see if they cared, rather than taking matters into their own hands.
It would also be reasonable for RedHat to request that resellers NOT imply they are selling the "Official" boxed set as these ads do.
LWN has updated their page, read the story now. It is no hoax it is just a huge clusterf*ck thanks to Red Hat and Amazon legal departments not having their sh*t together.
This is no hoax.
However, I still think this is much ado about nothing, unless and until we have official word from RH HQ.
--Zontar The Mindless (I'm @ school, my password ain't.)
Bestlinux.tf is hosted by reliantwebhosting.com and yes they do use NT. It was previously hosted by a linux based provider in Kansas of all places where the site was linux powered. My home server is Caldera 2.2 and is linux powered so I feel justified in using the linux powered logo. I have deployed more linux boxes than winblows boxes in the last year and this adds further credence to my claim of linux powered.
Go bash microshaft for running hotmail on a non windoze box or find something of substance to whine about...maybe some cheese and crackers would go nicely with your wine...
Robb
-seller of the Distribution formerly known as Red Hat Linux GPL
I did contact Chris Folma at Red Hat legal 919-547-0012. She confirmed the policy statement but since David Shumannfang was unavailable could not discuss how discussions with Amazon had taken place or what changes might occur. Further discussions with Howard Jacobson (same phone #) will reveal the same details. Call for yourself. I spoke with the President of Red Hat this a.m. and he is doing a wonderful job of damage control. It will probably come out as a misunderstanding between their legal departments. However, if the pressure isn't placed on Red Hat and sites like amazon begin enforcing trademark/copyright issues it will force many sellers out of business which in turn means the masses will not be exposed to linux. They will be stuck with winblows. Most people have heard of it and will try it for under 10 bux. Almost no one will gamble 80 bux on it however. Remove linux exposure from the masses and you'll be os/2 all over again... Robb =Seller of the Distribution formerly known as Red Hat linux GPL
I did contact Chris Folma at Red Hat legal 919-547-0012. She confirmed the policy statement but since David Shumannfang was unavailable could not discuss how discussions with Amazon had taken place or what changes might occur. Further discussions with Howard Jacobson (same phone #) will reveal the same details. Call for yourself.
I spoke with the President of Red Hat this a.m. and he is doing a wonderful job of damage control. It will probably come out as a misunderstanding between their legal departments.
However, if the pressure isn't placed on Red Hat and sites like amazon begin enforcing trademark/copyright issues it will force many sellers out of business which in turn means the masses will not be exposed to linux. They will be stuck with winblows. Most people have heard of it and will try it for under 10 bux. Almost no one will gamble 80 bux on it however. Remove linux exposure from the masses and you'll be os/2 all over again...
Robb
=Seller of the Distribution formerly known as Red Hat linux GPL
I've seen a number of deceptive ads on auctions
selling "RedHat 6.0" cd's.
They show the RedHat logo, sometimes even a shot
of the official box.
The final selling price? $2.99 or so. Obviously,
it's not the official set, but the free set.
I'm not saying it's true in this case, but I do
think this guy is biting the hand that gave
him a great product to sell, and Roblimo, well
he posts anti-linux stiff all the time, so this
is just another in a long line.
Gee, if I'd known three years ago that Linux distributors were going to have bloody LEGAL DEPARTMNETS... hmm, maybe I would have taken a second that at that thar' BSD thing.
He really SHOULD have noted in his ad that he WASN'T selling the offical boxed set, but I doubt he was trying to be intentionally misleading.
Sure, it's annoying and confusing. Personally, I'll save my outrage for when they stop cooperating with the community on more important issues, like the code.
Why get all in a fit because they don't want people selling things, labelled as Red Hat, when Red Hat has absolutely no control over what it actually is. Suppose someone starts selling an incomplete or otherwise broken copy of a distro? Lots of people could just figure that RH is at fault- it's thier software, right? They are covering thier butts. It is a smart move, IMHO.
So Red Hat Software INC owns the rights to "Red Hat", but does that mean anyone else can use "RedHat" without the space etc? If they start doing all this sh*t they are gonna lose alot of support from people. Get ready for the next microsoft.
No need to explain why.
Everyone takes Microsoft to task for everything here. If there is a bug in Microsoft, MS is so bad. Yet If there is a bug in linux, it's something that has not been tested, or some other lame excuse.
"RedHat World" is just an example, maybe I should have checked the internic database first. Also I forgot to add, what if the site sold the GPL 1.99 cds, would that make a difference in Red Hat, Inc,'s attitude.
This is one fucked up world we have here... Companies can get IPO without offering any products ... Look at the fucking RedHat... they sell stuff that's available for free. How long this king of "business" will last , hmm ??
Hey, that's their trademark. No problemo. They own their trademark. What's to discuss?
Right, and let's hope that the company we all work for doesn't make any money either so we can all be laid off and go live in happy hippy work-free profit-free environment forever!
I think its funny that Prince has the WHOLE world believing he actually changed his name to a symbol... jokes on you.....
Why isn't anyone complaining about MacMillan et. al. here? They're obviously in it for the money as well, and could someone remind me what THEY have done for the Linux community lately?
Such an action by RedHat (which has not been confirmed, AFAIK) would not diminish any of the freedoms on which our movement is based. Its only affect is to incovenience those who wish to resell RedHat's distribution (usually with no value added) without paying RedHat, and those who wish to buy RedHat's distribution without paying RedHat. It does not deny them the right to do so. Most readers here probably aren't used to thinking in terms of a growing business. To RedHat, building their brand may have a profound effect on their future. Insuring that products called RedHat actually came from RedHat seems likely to help them do this. Most of us should be happy that RedHat can find ways to improve their business without taking freedom away from the community. Even if you don't believe that RedHat popularizing Linux will benefit you directly (which it almost certainly will), recognize that RedHat has generally promoted the values of our community; and as long as they continue to, we should respect their goal of building a successful business. (And to those who think that wanting a large business is evil, where did your computer come from?) Hats off to them!
go make propagando for your page somehere else luser
Such an action by RedHat (which has not been confirmed, AFAIK) would not diminish any of the freedoms on which our movement is based. Its only affect is to incovenience those who wish to resell RedHat's distribution (usually with no value added) without paying RedHat, and those who wish to buy RedHat's distribution without paying RedHat. It does not deny them the right to do so.
Most readers here probably aren't used to thinking in terms of a growing business. To RedHat, building their brand may have a profound effect on their future. Insuring that products called RedHat actually came from RedHat seems likely to help them do this.
Most of us should be happy that RedHat can find ways to improve their business without taking freedom away from the community. Even if you don't believe that RedHat popularizing Linux will benefit you directly (which it almost certainly will), recognize that RedHat has generally promoted the values of our community; and as long as they continue to, we should respect their goal of building a successful business.
(And to those who think that wanting a large business is evil, where did your computer come from?)
Hats off to them!
Interesting ports on (209.90.158.216):
**snip**
Remote operating system guess: Windows NT4 / Win95 / Win98
True, but appending the story with [UPDATE:] might be a better way to go, so we can see the path that the story took. It might make the earliest posts make more sense, since they were referring to your original version. IMHO. ALso - Thanks for doing the research on this story. Slasdhot is looking up!
Man I'd like to get at least 20 of these and build a Beuowulf cluster.
Tomorrow: "No more free FTP downloads"
The Next Day: "Add this proprietary app to the CD to make copying illegal"
Later: "Raise the price"
Still later: "Let's partner with Microsoft"
Oh well, it was fun while it lasted. I wonder if the Slackware distro has improved since version 3.0?
--
Stop the world. I want off.
I've seen another dude on ebay pulling the same exact shit with the Solaris free cd offer. He gets it from Sun, then turns around and resells the shit for serious profit. I think a lot of people don't realize what the license they're getting with it, and that tis is not the retail version.
Sands is a scumbag.
Here's the letter from Amazon confirming:
-----Original Message-----
From: elyssa@amazon.com [mailto:elyssa@amazon.com] On Behalf Of
alliance@amazon.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:43 PM
To:
Cc: alliance@amazon.com
Subject: Item Removal Request
Greetings from Amazon.com Auctions.
We are writing to ask you to remove your auctions for Red Hat Linux
products. We are taking this action due to violations of the Red Hat
trademarked name and logo. Please remove them by 5 pm tomorrow night,
or we will take them down ourselves.
Amazon.com highly values the copyrights and trademarks of all buyers
and sellers on our Auction site. We also strive to protect our
customers from receiving illegal, illegitimate, or misleading items.
So, Amazon.com has been working very closely with the software
industry to identify and remove unauthorized copyright and
trademark infringing software on our Auction site.
In this case, Linux can be downloaded, recopied, and resold, however,
the use of the trademarked name, "Red Hat," or it's "shadowman"
logo may not be used to promote or sell any other software. Please
note for a Linux program to be labeled "Red Hat," it must come
with the original box, manuals and registration and the software
must remain unmodified.
If you choose to relist the items, please do not refer to Red Hat
Linux in any way as that would be a violation of both our Community
Rules and the U.S. Trademark Act.
As you may have not been aware of this policy, any commissions fees
associated with the cancelled Auction will be credited back to your
credit card.
Thank you for your cooperation and your interest in Amazon.com Auctions.
Best Wishes,
Alliance Program
www.amazon.com
Amazon.com Auctions
Started with books...What will be next?
I hope someone does go after his ass. He's ripping a lot of unsuspecting people, which is not good for Linux...
Red Linux release 6.0 (Mosklix)
Kernel 2.2.5-15 on an i686
kremvax login:
Assuming, of course, that the rumors are true. When I first started using linux, I bought a boxed copy of Red Hat linux from MacMillan (sp?) Digital publishing. How many linux coders do *they* employ? I don't use Red Hat much any more, but I still buy their distro from time to time to try it out on a spare machine (I'd rather report bugs to debian, thank you very much!).
Here's some of the proof requested:
-----Original Message-----
From: elyssa@amazon.com [mailto:elyssa@amazon.com] On Behalf Of
alliance@amazon.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:43 PM
To:
Cc: alliance@amazon.com
Subject: Item Removal Request
Greetings from Amazon.com Auctions.
We are writing to ask you to remove your auctions for Red Hat Linux
products. We are taking this action due to violations of the Red Hat
trademarked name and logo. Please remove them by 5 pm tomorrow night,
or we will take them down ourselves.
Amazon.com highly values the copyrights and trademarks of all buyers
and sellers on our Auction site. We also strive to protect our
customers from receiving illegal, illegitimate, or misleading items.
So, Amazon.com has been working very closely with the software
industry to identify and remove unauthorized copyright and
trademark infringing software on our Auction site.
In this case, Linux can be downloaded, recopied, and resold, however,
the use of the trademarked name, "Red Hat," or it's "shadowman"
logo may not be used to promote or sell any other software. Please
note for a Linux program to be labeled "Red Hat," it must come
with the original box, manuals and registration and the software
must remain unmodified.
If you choose to relist the items, please do not refer to Red Hat
Linux in any way as that would be a violation of both our Community
Rules and the U.S. Trademark Act.
As you may have not been aware of this policy, any commissions fees
associated with the cancelled Auction will be credited back to your
credit card.
Thank you for your cooperation and your interest in Amazon.com Auctions.
Best Wishes,
Alliance Program
www.amazon.com
Amazon.com Auctions
Started with books...What will be next?
You can apologize after reading the letter from amazon:
-----Original Message-----
From: elyssa@amazon.com [mailto:elyssa@amazon.com] On Behalf Of
alliance@amazon.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:43 PM
To:
Cc: alliance@amazon.com
Subject: Item Removal Request
Greetings from Amazon.com Auctions.
We are writing to ask you to remove your auctions for Red Hat Linux
products. We are taking this action due to violations of the Red Hat
trademarked name and logo. Please remove them by 5 pm tomorrow night,
or we will take them down ourselves.
Amazon.com highly values the copyrights and trademarks of all buyers
and sellers on our Auction site. We also strive to protect our
customers from receiving illegal, illegitimate, or misleading items.
So, Amazon.com has been working very closely with the software
industry to identify and remove unauthorized copyright and
trademark infringing software on our Auction site.
In this case, Linux can be downloaded, recopied, and resold, however,
the use of the trademarked name, "Red Hat," or it's "shadowman"
logo may not be used to promote or sell any other software. Please
note for a Linux program to be labeled "Red Hat," it must come
with the original box, manuals and registration and the software
must remain unmodified.
If you choose to relist the items, please do not refer to Red Hat
Linux in any way as that would be a violation of both our Community
Rules and the U.S. Trademark Act.
As you may have not been aware of this policy, any commissions fees
associated with the cancelled Auction will be credited back to your
credit card.
Thank you for your cooperation and your interest in Amazon.com Auctions.
Best Wishes,
Alliance Program
www.amazon.com
Amazon.com Auctions
Started with books...What will be next?
Lets say I own the name/company "RedHat World" and have a website up at www.redhatworld.com etc and it is full of guides, howtos and just general help etc. What can Red Hat Inc. do? Would they sue/force me to remove the site, or be happy that I am helping Red Hat Linux users and promoting thier Linux Distribution.
Selling a 2 CD Set for 3.99 or 9.99 and offering lifetime support and a lifetime warranty. Whew I must be getting rich off that, NOT. These are pressed CD's not CDR's. Who else offers lifetime support and warranty for less than $10 on a Linux + PowerTools 2 CD Set? NO ONE!!! It's a heck of a deal, not a ripoff.
Maybe we can find a REALLY embarrassing name, just to force them into letting go of their boneheaded point of view...
And so what, if Amazon (or RedHat for that matter) wants to protect there potential customers from beeing bluffed ?
I take the Amazon/RedHat stand here.
- AftanGustur, not logging in this morning
Yeah this guy is a true believer all right...Such scum needs to be rooted out. I'm all for it.
Giving new users lifetime support and warranty and selling 2 CDs for 3.99 or 9.99 is a heck of a deal, I don't care what you say!
"FREE LIFETIME SUPPORT AND WARRANTY!" That seriously degrades you credibility. "LIFETIME WARRANTY, Linux Powered" Your webserver is an NT box. If you cannot setup apache, you certainly are unable to offer Lifetime Support for Linux. Lying weenie. I hope the script kiddies get to your "Linux Powered" box.
Whatever you think about Amazon, they're 100% customer service, and they don't want the ebay type scams on their new auction system. Very good move on their part to protect bidders from garbage listings.
He does not sell non GPL software. Wordperfect is from www.download.com - get your copy now FREE. Nothing is copyright violation it's all freeware, hello mcfly.
Well, your suspicion is wrong so far. My name's in the kernel credits, and I very much appreciate them cutting off Mr. Sands at the knees. I haven't seen Mr. Sands' name in any credits, or any sign he's ever sponsored any Linux development at all. Meanwhile, if you're looking for a socialist-rhetoric OS to work on, how about the Hurd? They could use some more hackers.
Regardless of what comes of this (assuming there's a 'situation' in the first place, given the bogus reports), you'll always be able to mirror and make copies. They'll never close off their FTP.
I wish there was some way to get rid of these morons who spit out these stories.
I don't really mind double posts on
WARNING! This is a FLAME Moderate it down for your protection.
Learn to read you dumbshit. A very few people have said, 'Yes, we understand why they are doing this and can see the point, but we still don't like it.' Almost everyone else is screaming about Red Hat becoming microsoft like. WE DON'T FUCKING LIKE the way Red Hat is handling this IF the story is reliable.
I imagine most of us can also understand why Microsoft does what it does, they want insane amounts of money. Well, they got insane amounts of money so looks like it worked.
To reiterate, go get hooked on on phonics so you can read the other posts before you spout useless drivel.
Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
To me, it means that it is a distribution created and SUPPORTED by Red Hat Inc. All of these cheesy third party companies that don't do any work but want to make money off of the hard work of others should be grateful that they are even allowed to distribute the bits. Why do they think they can use the Red Hat name? Have you ever gone to the supermarket and purchased "albertson" or "safeway" products? They usually sit right next to the industry brand leading products. Guess what? Those clone products are usually based on the industry brand, and in many cases are IDENTICAL products! The brand is what generates money for owner of the brand. It is also what costs a lot of money to develop and what is used to finance the operation so that they, and the parasites, can have something to sell. If you disagree with the need to protect a brand, do a little research. What else does a company which has successfully created a brand have to sell? The brand tells the buyer that they can trust the product and that they can rely on the promise of support and product continuity for the long term. Long after these fly-by-night cry babies have taken their profits and moved on to greener pastures. Take a course in marketing 101. Is the corporate name "Red Hat Inc." in the public domain?
Heres some proof from Amazon
-----Original Message-----
From: elyssa@amazon.com [mailto:elyssa@amazon.com] On Behalf Of
alliance@amazon.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:43 PM
To:
Cc: alliance@amazon.com
Subject: Item Removal Request
Greetings from Amazon.com Auctions.
We are writing to ask you to remove your auctions for Red Hat Linux
products. We are taking this action due to violations of the Red Hat
trademarked name and logo. Please remove them by 5 pm tomorrow night,
or we will take them down ourselves.
Amazon.com highly values the copyrights and trademarks of all buyers
and sellers on our Auction site. We also strive to protect our
customers from receiving illegal, illegitimate, or misleading items.
So, Amazon.com has been working very closely with the software
industry to identify and remove unauthorized copyright and
trademark infringing software on our Auction site.
In this case, Linux can be downloaded, recopied, and resold, however,
the use of the trademarked name, "Red Hat," or it's "shadowman"
logo may not be used to promote or sell any other software. Please
note for a Linux program to be labeled "Red Hat," it must come
with the original box, manuals and registration and the software
must remain unmodified.
If you choose to relist the items, please do not refer to Red Hat
Linux in any way as that would be a violation of both our Community
Rules and the U.S. Trademark Act.
As you may have not been aware of this policy, any commissions fees
associated with the cancelled Auction will be credited back to your
credit card.
Thank you for your cooperation and your interest in Amazon.com Auctions.
Best Wishes,
Alliance Program
www.amazon.com
Amazon.com Auctions
Started with books...What will be next?
Now, why does he call his version "Commercial", and on top of that with a capital "C". In fact I propose his wording is intended to mislead as to the real differences between his stuff and the real stuff. Also notice how he capitalizes words and colors his words in the disclaimer. He makes it sound like there's no difference at all.
He's worried because his con business might go up in smoke. What a luser.
The two problems with your (yes, I know it's facetious) plan, Duncan, are 1) somebody is going to check your story with at least one or two other sources before it runs, and 2) even if the story is posted on the fly and edited "live" online in a hurry instead of behind the scenes, the same way Slashdot code is also often edited on the live site, you run a significant risk of getting crucified by other Slashdot readers over your contribution to it. This is a rough forum. It doesn't always give you what you want. Current case is a fine example. I don't think Mr. Sands got either the story or the reaction he wanted.
Modified four times, actually. And we didn't even think about running it at all until I had word from someone else, even though off-the-record, that this was not something cooked up by Amazon. I am probably going to knock off and have a drink now. More info will come, I'm sure.
I openly said I changed the story four times, and I had the 'nads to not only sign my name but to make it easy to get hold of me. There will be a follow-up story when we get more info. Relax.
Sounds good to me
Compaq is partnering with the Chinese government
On "Red Flag" Linux...
I know its true 'cause I saw it online...
I prefer Crimson Fedora.
-Chuck
My Freakin Blog
Of course the slashdot community will never be happy. It is a large group of diverse geeks. While I agree with you the next guy may not. We are not one homogenious group with one spokesperson. Why do you think linux has problems with bad advocacy? Thanks to e-mail anyone can voice their opinion. I don't think this is a bad thing. In fact I think this is a great thing even with all the flames and bad advocacy. People need to realize these facts. Ever heard the saying "You can't please all the people all of the time. Only some of the people some of the time." It is a saying because it is true. I have noticed alot of these types of contradictions on slashdot, but chalk it up to diversity and individuality.
Me personally, I'm proud to be part of a community where people can think for themselves even if you doesn't follow the common mold. I could understand your complaints if you saw the same people making contradicting posts. But still you should only aim it at those individuals.
Notice: I am not saying every slashdotter or linux users thinks for themselves. Not all of us do. Nor do we do it all the time. People do get swept up in emotion or caught in the moment. Sometimes it just takes somebody who has thought it through to start asking questions. Or just getting people to start thinking in some way.
You did throw a "some of you" in there at one point, but I have just been getting a little tired of the negative sweeping generalizations being made, because some people decided to flame FreeBSD or some company. And they take it as the whole linux community hates them. Instead of taking it for what it was, just some individuals opinions.
Sorry, rant mode off. :)
--
?
This is what, the fifth time you've posted this letter? Calm down already.
I'm sure everybody saw it the first time; there's no need to spam everyone with it.
Also, most of the posts you've been responding to have been asking for proof from _Red Hat_, not from Amazon. A letter from Amazon is not the same thing as confirmation from Red Hat, no matter how many times you post it.
Please stop.
Thanks for joining the discussion, Mr. Sands.
>expect support from RedHat. Unfortuately, most of these people are >not buying Official RedHat Linux that comes with support. When they >find out that they can't get support, it goes something like this:
Exactly. And you're starting to see the same thing with the Macmillan bundling of Mandrake. The Macmillan package isn't bad but the packaging does tend to make you think you're buying something you really aren't.
I could certainly see Alan telling Rob Young to "fuck off" if Redhat continues down this path.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Actually, this isn't a concern. Once something is released, it's released, and integrating it isn't much of a problem. Especially if you've already got an infrastructure set up, building the new package is cake. Testing & fixing a distribution as a whole is what takes time.
From what I've seen, doing things like this (being first to release something w/o proper testing) have actually bitten Red Hat rather than helping them.. Witness for instance, the buggy libc6 they shipped with 5.0 which caused many of the setuid binaries to be exploitable, and the less-than-ready gnome shipped in 6.0.
If redhat wants to keep others from using its name, that is their right. Afterall, nobody would be surprised if any other company did this.
They are in a tough market, selling a product that is available for free. They need something that is THEIRS. The software sure isnt, so they only really have the name and the reputation.
As long as they keep the software free, that is all that really matters, lets stay focused on what the open source movement is all about.
Remember, redhat shouldnt be penalised for being successful. They have contributed a lot of software back to the community. If we lose them it would be a loss to us all, so lets support them surviving in the industry they are in!
I personally don't see any problem with this. I think they have every right to protect their name. Especially when there are so many distributions based off of RedHat(TM). It allows them to distinct themselves from everybody else.
I have official versions of 5.1, and 5.2. Then I discovered Cheapbytes... and got 6.0 for 9 bucks, total. (Source: $2, Binaries: $2, Shipping: $5)
/usr/src/redhat directory, and certain rpm interfaces are programmed to look in /mnt/cdrom/RedHaT/RPMS/. Even Xinit is set up to display a image of Tux wearing a RedHat hat.
Neither 5.1, nor 5.2 offers MetroX. 5.0 may have. The bonus CDs didn't contain anything that was of interest to me.
Cheapbytes Redhat comes with a Myth2 demo and a copy of Wordperfect. It does not come with a copy of the Redhat Manual (which is quite good, btw), a bumper sticker, a mousepad, or a boot floppy. I upgraded mine by booting the cdrom, so even this last item wasn't really missed.
As for not using the name redhat, I'm not sure that's possible. After all, rpm builds take place in the
"The distro formerly known as Red Hat"
I sighted a "Red Linux" yesterday, in a German media market.
Much better....
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Remember, the GPL merely says that they must provide source code to any customer who asks, and must inform the customer of that right. If I recall the GPL correctly, it does NOT say ANYWHERE that Redhat must give away copies of their program for free. They must give their source to any customer, and they must allow that customer to copy the source further, but they DO NOT have to provide either binaries OR source to non-customers.
Now, they may continue to give away RedHat via FTP for free, but there is NOTHING graven in concrete that says they have to. Eventually, RedHat's FTP site could be just for access to source code packages AFTER you had paid the license fee.
Other people would be able to mirror the source and binaries (at least of the GPLed portions of Redhat Linux), and RedHat couldn't do a thing about it.
Whether or not they will change that much remains to be seen. Frankly, I expect them to tighten down a lot.
Hmm...Some that come to mind...(remember, adding/removing a space/hyphen *can* (in most circumstances) make it safe) RH GPL Linux Red-Hat-GPL Linux Unofficial RedHat Linux GPL "RedHat-style" Linux "I can't believe it's not RedHat" Linux Hed Rat Linux ;) Rouge Chapeau Linux Scarlet Headwarmer Linux Bloody Hat! Linux (now we're getting silly) "The Linux that can't be called by the same name as that of it's identical Official distribution that costs $50 but merely offers a nice printed manual and tech support" Linux I'll come up with more later - this is too fun =)
Hmm...Some that come to mind...(remember, adding/removing a space/hyphen *can* (in most circumstances) make it safe)
;)
RH GPL Linux
Red-Hat-GPL Linux
Unofficial RedHat Linux
GPL "RedHat-style" Linux
"I can't believe it's not RedHat" Linux
Hed Rat Linux
Rouge Chapeau Linux
Scarlet Headwarmer Linux
Bloody Hat! Linux (now we're getting silly)
"The Linux that can't be called by the same name as that of it's identical Official distribution that costs $50 but merely offers a nice printed manual and tech support" Linux
I'll come up with more later - this is too fun =)
Well, I poked through the comments, so maybe someone else figured this out. If I were CheapBytes or LinuxMall or someone who sold the GPL image on CD, I'd be calling my lawyers in to check that my "CheapBytes Red Hat 6.0" is okay or out. Thank you Red Hat... but no thanks. Go get yourselves some more lawyers and a PR firm... meanwhile, my distro preferences are changing... I hear SuSE, Debian, and Mandrake calling, and *BSD is an option too....
Oh yeah, I was down the trademark road over LilithFair.org too, and lemme just note that threats and having someone else do your dirty work is not the way to make friends. Let's see Bob Young and Jeff Bezos explain this one, personally. Just so we know that this comes straight from the top and not from middle-and-bottom-layer grunts and flacks.
Well, probably. Anyway, you should find latest developpement at the top of http://lwn.net/daily/sands.html.
:wq
I couldn't have said it better myself, not only
that coming from a long time slashdot reader (i remember your posts from the early slashdot beginnings:).
Awesome!
It's the small island nation of TinyFugue =)
Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
Intosi
Intosi
Hmm. I'm not familiar with Trinux. I guess I've got some research to do. ;)
--
.-.--
Blue Hat - Mandrake
Old Hat - Slackware
GNU Hat - Debian
--
.-.--
uses NT or 95 or dos... see his directory trees of the CD's.. he's not credible to begin with.. how trustworthy would his distro be, if he's based in an OS that's from m$?
--
If you read the letter from Amazon, it doesn't mention anywhere, that RedHat complained.
My guess would be, that someone complained to amazon, that they bought Red Hat, and didn't get "official Red Hat". So Amazon acted to protect their customers. And that Red Hat itself, is completely blameless.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
Wow, you sure have come a long way from a company that is just trying to protect it's good name. Would you say the same thing if Microsoft decided to distribute a free linux distribution based on Red Hat (or any other dist.) and call it Microsoft Linux?
Let's all stop using Linux in general, or *BSD, or BeOS, or OS/2, or Hurd, or Plan 9, or Mach, or Minix, just in case any one of them helps a company make money.
Let's stick with the devil we know, just in case it is possible that sometime, somewhere, there may be another devil around the corner, waiting to get bigger.
Perhaps not the wisest thing I've heard today... but you have the choice to do so.
--
QDMerge 0.21!
how to invest, a novice's guide
...I vote for Crimson Fedora. It has that nice sinister ring to it! _Deirdre
-- ----------------------------------------------
Vive le logiciel... Libre!!!
If they'd thought about how to contact people a little more before opening their big mouths, I think this would have worked out a whole lot better.
First, they should have come to *all* of us with the problem, and asked for suggestions. No. Instead, they managed to piss off a good percentage of the people who have helped them get where they are, in ways they can't even see.
Second, they should have offered GPL distributors an alternative way to distribute the community work, rather than just complaining about the name.
I feel uneasy about this whole business, because I'm beginning to wonder if they've decided to ditch the people what brung 'em. If they haven't, 's too bad they had another SNAFU like the "community stock offering," and I hope they do right by it. But if they have, y'all better sell that stock, but quick. Myself, I came from Slacware to Red Hat; I can go back.
--------------Rev. C.C.Chips---------------- For the real truth, visit
Dear Red Hat:
...assuming you *are* interested in working this out together with the rest of us, here goes.
NOTE: This would apply to the pure, FTP'ed version that low-cost CD distributors create. Unless otherwise specified, the word "Linux" goes after. If Red Hat would "sign on" to this idea, they could say that a distribution with their chosen name is the free, unsupported, FTP'd version.
NOTE: My apologies if anyone has already claimed one of these names. Any trademarked Linux version with a name below wouldn't apply.
FreeHat
Durham
TopHat
Magic
Rabbit
Power (as in "Power Tools"
Electric
NC-Free
Raw
Pristine
Community
Public
Firehouse
People's
Generic Red Hat
Unsupported Red Hat
Ruby
MountanTop
Xxxxx-Valley
Natural
Red Hat GNU/Linux
Hacker's Hat
Programmer's Hat
HobbyHat
OpenHat
I hope you guys find this interesting. I figure some of the shout ones would be usable with "Red Hat" at the beginning of the name, but if not, so be it.
Any webmasters interested in starting a contest?
--------------Rev. C.C.Chips---------------- For the real truth, visit
I always thought RedHat was the name of the distro and "The Official RedHat" was the name of the boxed set (at least that's what's on all of my RH boxes).
This just leaves me with a bad feeling - it kinda reminds me of the way Unisys let everyone use the GIF format for free until it became very popular and then they come in and collect fees from everyone.
I love the GPL - if RedHat gets too pushy about things like this I'm moving to Mandrake Linux (http://www.linux-mandrake.com). Hopefully I won't have to do this.
\forall code \in C, \frac{\Delta readability(code)}{\Delta t} < 0
Or better yet - in the spirit of the Unix wars R*dHat
\forall code \in C, \frac{\Delta readability(code)}{\Delta t} < 0
I vote for R*dHat (like Un*x)
\forall code \in C, \frac{\Delta readability(code)}{\Delta t} < 0
that's okay, it looks like a bash shell to me ;)
i thought I had no sig?
LOL!
Hmmm, I'm not really into the goth thing myself, but she does have a very pretty face and gorgeous eyes anyway. Definitely the type I'd ask out on a casual date if I lived in the same city, barring a major personality clash. (Ya never know if ya never ask.) Thanks for the info, Craig.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
I don't want her to get harassed or stalked or anything, but could someone please post a link to a picture of her? My curiosity is definitely piqued. Besides, girls in chains rawk.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
$ seems appropriate
shit.
Well, with power comes corruption, I suppose. Or maybe not. RedHat is still a good product. Maybe it is just the nature of Linux users to attack who is ever on top at the moment. Maybe we have valid reasons for doing so. But before we thrash on RedHat, why don't we think for a moment. A good OS which can be downloaded for free, ordered for $2, etc... We always are saying how we think more people should run Linux.
If none of the distros go mainstream, Linux will never be mass-recognized by the public. RedHat, by putting out an IPO and making trademarks, is gaining money. Money they need to take down our true nemisis. Even if RedHat becomes the next MicroSoft action-wise, at least it will be backed up by a good OS.
But that's just how I view it.
If you think you know what the hell is going on you're probably full of shit. -- Robert Anton Wilson
jdube is who
Well Craw, I guess I will respond to you on each point.
/. was basicly a clearing house for interesting stories that were found on the net. On some occasions the boys would break a story, after having some facts about it, not just the person complaining. If this is going to be the future of slashdot, I may write to complain that I was told by yyy.com that Brand X distro is being used on a ship on an expedition to club baby seals. I mean, it has to be true if I got an email from a third party and sent it to slashdot as a statement from Brand X, right?
1. Rob should be able to respond as he see's fit. I am not knocking you for your opinion, but if he can write the story, he can defend it if he wishes.
2. Thanks for agreeing with me on the update thing:)
3. Slashdot should not be in the business of creating the news. Previous to the purchase by Andover,
Duncan
I forgot to mention in the #3 section above:
I also include my website which conviently sells baby seal-skin coats cheaper than my competitors.
Duncan
So they protect thier trademark. Big deal. Let them do what they wish. If you don't like it, don't buy thier product or thier stock. Personally, I will continue to use thier distro, no matter the name, because I like how it works. If I have to purchase it under the name of "This is actually the $80 distro without the support from the company" I will do that for 1.99 from cheap bytes or get someone in the LUG to burn me a copy.
In the time between writing my reply and refreshing the page you have changed the story Roblimo. What is the deal? If you make a change from a statement that you have confirmed this story through two people to what you have there now about the amazon spokeswoman and well known linux vendor off the record. Please have the nads to make a followup comment rather than erasing what you posted. you are supposed to be a journalist after all. Take some responsibility when you make a mistake. Duncan
This is being blow out of proportion...
There is no proof RedHat was involved, only Amazon.com and all they wanted was for him not to advertise his product in a way that made it look as though it was the official distro. Theyr'e not saying he can't call it Redhat, just that he cant make use of the official name on a product that isn't the official product. IE, he is passing off his own burnt CD's as the "official" RedHat boxed set.
---------------------------
"I'm not gonna say anything inspirational, I'm just gonna fucking swear a lot"
---------------------------
I don't understand your comment at all. Why do you think this is "...an effort to make it clear... that they are merely _one_ of the distributions of Linux...?" They're not trying to validate alternative Linux distros, they're trying to prevent people from selling brown paper bag Red Hat Linux CDs and cashing in on Red Hat's advertising expenditures. It's as simple as that.
As far as the "linux == redhat" debate goes, why do you think taking the Red Hat name off of repackages will help people understand that there are other distros? If anything I would think that associating all Red Hat copies with the company would be easier to understand - one company must have competition. Maybe now they'll think their alternatives are "Official Red Hat" and "Unofficial Red Hat".
I like Red Hat. I'm using Red Hat 6.0 now. But I don't see why you feel the need to defend this practice. It's just common business (assuming, of course, that Red Hat is actually doing ANYTHING here, of which we have little proof...)
/* The beatings will continue until morale improves. */
... I guess you might do something like that, if you don't appreciate what Red Hat has done for Linux and free software. They are the first publicly traded "software company" I know of to allow and encourage their flagship product to be copied freely and to avoid draconian licensing policies entirely.
Is it just me, or is that name reminiscent of Pink Flamingos?
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Ummm... dude...
:-)
I don't think anyone has ever taken Microsoft to task for not allowing anyone else to slap the name "Microsoft" on their product...
(Not that anyone would want to... but that's another story
I don't like MS for other reasons, but they have nothing to do with this...
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
> But let's kill this beast before it grows into something big enough to get away with sodomizing our collective behinds.
I take it, then, that you believe that any big company is intrinsically bad? That as soon as something is big, then it's a threat?
Oh, I see. You want to keep everything small, so that the entire economy will be based off a zillion small companies, all selling very small product amounts.
Right... economy of scale is bad... sure the eceonmoy will shrink and a number of people will have to be laid off, but that's all well and good, so long as Red Hat can't possibly have the capability of ripping anyone off, despite whether or not they had any intention of doing it...
Cool! I look forward to seeing how this will work!
</SARCASM>
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Jeez! This is about the 5th time I've seen it already!
You're not only a troublemaker, you're a spam-happy troublemaker!
ARGHHHH!!!!!!!
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Seriously, they should then give out a different name to be used with NON-official Red Hat Linux. A lot of names come to mind... "A Red Hat based GNU system", "Black Cat Linux", "Old Hat", "Free Hat", "Red Hut", or maybe even just a (penguin logo) in the vein of that Prince symbol whatchamacallit.
The possibilities are endless, da?
tf is the French Southern Territories for the
interested.
I have no idea where that is though.
"The last thing I want to do is deal with a bunch of people who want something."
Major Major
If Red Hat TM wants to start enforcing a trade mark they haven't been for years that's fine. It's their right and probably a wise move. However the way they have chosen to do it (if this story is true) sucks.
Nobody wants to be threatened with legal action (well at least not normal people). If they want to start enforcing their trade mark then please;
Make a public statement (if they have to wait until the end of the "quiet period", fine) that they are going to start doing so.
Tell everyone if/how they can use your trademark.Give everyone a few days to comply, then fire off the "lawyer letters".
Now:To you lusers who sell "free" software for unreasonable prices. You know who you are, tring to pass it off as the official version, trying to live near the event horizon of fraudulent behavior, praying on the unknowing, the naive.
You suck eat a bag of shit.It's people like you who keep the world from being a nice place. Always looking for a sucker to dupe. Go charge too much for something else.
Don't tread on Linux!"The last thing I want to do is deal with a bunch of people who want something."
Major Major
The creeping featurisis (one of Antipatterns, if you know what I'm talking about) alone can easily kill it. A recent article about FreeBSD had a point here - if it doesn't work, let the ones who can and want do it, but don't let those who don't know what is 'RTFM', let alone do it, get even close to it.
One of languages that is not native in the North America has a saying: "Never show unfinished work to the fool".
Hey - conspiracy freaks, this is what normally happens to trademarks when you become a publicly traded company.
I agree with Red Hat completely. If you think about it, their trademarks are all that they have. They've built a brand that people know, and places such as Cheapbytes and MacMillan are trying to leach off of that effort. When you sell free software, you have to offer something that the others cannot. Red Hat can offer 'Red Hat Linux', and nobody else should be able to without explicit permission from Red Hat.
Can you imagine the "fragmentation" FUD that would be flung at Linux if several different companies with different support schemes offered a version of 'Red Hat Linux'? It would weaken the brand and cost Red Hat a lot of money that they are sure to invest right back into the community.
/. finds me to be 20% Troll, 80% Funny
Freedom's just another word for nothing left Zulus
The Linux Formerly Known As Red Hat.
Seems that idea was too obvious.
It would be nice if he actually did the background work before posting the story. In the 20 minutes up to now, the text of the story has been modified at least twice.
Or perhaps (in the same vein) Rdhat.
(Apologies to users without euro currency symbols)
--
This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along.
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
perhaps they could call it "the distribution formerly known as red hat"?
- mark
Capo Rossa...
"Anyone that has ever gotten an idea based on any of my work and done something better with it-good for you."--J.Carmack
I didn't know that that was the only one. Assumed that was the difference between ordering/download. I downloaded 5.2.
So, we should buy the disto because it supports the company that created it. Sort of like why you buy a music CD (although the record company gets its 80% or so!)
Official Red Hat has Metro X (???) and other propriatary software that requires a license. It also comes with support.
The distribution is all GNU and other free software.
I guess book writers will have to get permission to use the name Red Hat(tm) or say something like "The Linux Distribution created by Red Hat Software". I don't think someone can say "Hey, you can't print the name of our company!"
If you modify/add-to/update the official Debian distrubution, aren't you required to label that it's not "Official Debian"? Get off of RedHat's back people they aren't that bad. Rail against Caldera or someone else who won't let you ftp all of their distrubution that they legally can, not RedHat.
Forget "based on Red Hat".
I want to see "based on Linux Standard Base"
That's the equalizer that keeps RedHat from becoming synonymous with Linux.
I'll tell you who can make that a reality -- SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS -- write to the LSB, state in your release notes that this software works on any linux machine of $ARCH architecture with $KERNEL_VER kernel or better that CONFORMS TO THE LINUX STANDARD BASE.
When the phrase "LSB Compliant" gains value, the distirbutions will want to ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H have to state that they conform to the LSB.
It's up to the software developers to actually comply to the LSB and demand that the distributions they develop on comply.
But that isn't the case. Windows crashes, is bloated, and as a result there's this OS around called Linux, that many people (including myself) use day in, day out. If Red Hat's product is "all that", then more power to them. That's what we want, anyway -- a great product. If not, we'll buy/download something else. This is exactly why many people aren't using MS products -- they want something better.
Anyway, it's extremely unlikely that Red Hat will have the "best" distro in everyone's eyes, so the other distros will still be around, if there is demand for them.
We (the Linux using community) still have just as much choice as before. Now, the choice is just a little less vague. I mean, if I took some Caldera or Debian or SuSE code and botched it to hell, called it "Dude's Caldera Linux", and sold it for $3.99, wouldn't I be trashing up Caldera's name? And making a quick buck? And deceiving a slew of potential Linux users?
And also, there's 5 BILLION dollars invested in their NAME. Dontcha think they should tighten up a juice?
And really... that's the issue.
RedHat must protect its name. The public is simply not familiar with the Linux environment. In the traditional corporate OS world - when you buy SomeOS, it came from the company that produces it and includes all the usual support, documentation, etc. If not, its an illeagal copy and it means fines and/or jail time for someone. With Linux, and its distros (corporate or not), this is not the case. It is quite legal to copy and sell Debian, RedHat, and _Sprocket_OS Linux. The problem is... how to keep from confusing your average non-clued customer?
The whole issue boils down to one question. If not "Red Hat Linux", what can one call it? Take a cue from Debian and call it "Unofficial RedHat"? Or will the entire "Red Hat" name be verbotten?
If I were to put one complaint above all others, I would label it "arrogance". Microsoft has an abundance of pure arrogance. Granted... they've not cornered the market (some Linux advocates have their own stashes of the stuff).
Microsoft's arrogance manifests itself in many ways. MS is slow to admit to security problems. They're just as slow to admit to bugs - and these days likely to charge you to fix them. They make some rather large claims about products that often fail to live up to expectations. They tend to absorb and destroy innovation. They'll lock away a technology and scream for open standards on technology they don't own. Then once they have a grip on that standard, they again tend to "extend" it to the point of incompatability with non-Microsoft products. All this is done as they use propoganda to attack competitors.
Linux is SUPPOSED to be different. In general, Linux has no hidden agendas. Development is done in the open. If there are problems, everyone gets to know them immediately. And they get fixed. That's not to say there will never be an entity within the Linux camp that will try to pull of simular strategies as Microsoft (which is why RedHat gets so much scrutiny). After all, Microsoft learned a lot of its strategy from IBM. However, Linux is not locked to any single entity. If someone did try those tactics, there's a good chance they'll become marginalized. There's hope in that.
You can find a number of them at http://www.spinster.org/my_photos.html, that's http://www.spinster.org/my_photos.html if that didn't work. She IS kinda cute, and I must admit to having certain statue-related leanings myself, so this whole MAE LING MAK NAKE-- um... I mean, You-know-who, You-know-what and you-know-what is pretty intriuging to me. Careful with that trademark, I think they mean business.
Another problem is that while Macmillian distributes their red hat through Ingram Micro, the largest computer distributor, red hat does not, so it is very easy for retailers to get confused.
Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
That said, fair use law allows the use of any trademarked name for the purpose of identification (perhaps requiring a notice that the name is indeed trademarked). Anyone and everyone can say they are selling copies of Red Hat CDs. That is why we are allowed to throw around the names of Microsoft, Sun, IBM, Red Hat, etc. with impunity, provided we don't slander or libel them. So the letter was either a hoax, Microsoft FUD, or a knee-jerk reaction to some misinformation. In any event, the issue has been denied by Red Hat and is totally moot.
do they have to rename it to something completely different now?
Why talk about pushing? I can understand Red Hat wanting to protect its name. From everything I've read there is nothing preventing you from selling a Red Hat distribution under your own name and stating that it is based on a Red Hat distribution. You just can't call your version "Red Hat". Call it Blue Stocking Linux, based on Red Hat's 6.0 distribution.
(This comment intentionally left blank.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
They don't want to alienate us too much- it could cost them everything
I am not a Linux coder and I'm not into Linux politics. I don't know what I'm talking about. BUT...
Hasn't Red Hat recently been noted to be hiring the most prominent and prolific Linux coders? If I'm correct about that, then I'm not sure about your statement "it could cost them everything". I'm not suggesting that Red Hat is currently doing anything illicit or disreputable, but if it ever did do such a thing, I wonder how the community would respond. If the "Lieutenants" continued to code Offical Red Hat X, then almost certainly the best code would always be most current in that version. Of course, because of the GPL, most of that code would make it out, but the lag would mean that Red Hat would consistently be on top. Do you think that non-participatroy Linux users (people like myself who don't contribute code) would really voluntarily downgrade our Linux experience in order to punish RHAT for some ethical quibble? Particularly a small one like this? I'm not sure what my personal response would be, but I have a sinking feeling that I might go for convenience over principle.
I guess what I'm asking is, just how legitimate is the idea that Linux is a community effort? Is that really true in your experience, or is the code base mostly comprised of the work of a few key players, with tiny bug patches here and there from the rest of the world? If the latter, then a breach of ethics might cost Red Hat very little indeed. Please give me your thoughts.
-konstant
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
Better dead than red.
Thx for clarifying it... I thought the licencse clearly stated that downloads are free but that media redistribution required licensing fees... oh well...
:)
As for downloading WP, nah I'll pass... I use SOffice (I paid for it, I mean $35 bucks to let those guys eat for a week... it was worth it
ZoeSch
I hate to agree with davecrazy but...
He's selling software like WordPerfect, Perfect Backup and other non GPL products for ridiculous amounts of money like $5 or summat.
Last time I checked WP for Linux was around $60 for commercial users...
Sounds like a god damned pirate that's trying to get some free publicity...
ZoeSch
I hate to agree with davecrazy but...
Looks like suck was right
A few friends of mine ran into the same wall. They had burned a box full of RedHat CD's for a local install-fest, and only ended up giving away half of the hundred they had burned. Now who wants to sit on fifty RH CDs? They tossed up an auction at ebay, (I think they were asking cost of media plus shipping). Later in the day, one of them gets mail from someone at RedHat asking that they clarify that the RH cds they were offering were not the boxed set, that the language they had used was intentionally misleading, and that ebay had been notified of his possible fraudulent attempt. They had not referred to the CDs as 'Official'; In fact, all the entry at ebay had said was "RedHat on CD-R. Complete distribution, correctly burned, with jewel cases." Ebay took no action, and they ended getting rid of all of them. I can see that RH's intent was to protect consumers from people offering 'Full RedHat' sets and then mailing bad burns. (as happens from time to time, usually through ignorance) When something like that happens, it isn't just a stain on RedHat, but on us all as members of the Linux community. What newbie will trust 'those hackers that ripped me off'? What is he going to say to his friends; that he was fooled by his own ignorance, or that he was cheated by some Linux hacker?
.sig: Now legally binding!
And of course they include the complete political writings of Richard Stallman and the FSF...
;-)
[
'Nuff said.
I personally do not understand all this comotion about the whole topic. The article clearly states that amazone.com issued a warning 'on behalf off...'. The same article also stated that RedHat itself cannot comment yet on the subject. So whats the problem? If it isn't official we should not trouble ourselfs with this IMHO. Lets just wait until RedHat does give an official statement which would be a better discussion topic IMO.
Fine, they can do that legally. But if that is their position, then they should also take their name off the product that can be downloaded from their site. It's not a boxed set.
They don't want to alienate us too much- it could cost them everything. And, as it was put earlier, what in the hell do they propose that we call the distribution, pray tell?
How about "the distribution formerly known as RedHat"?
There is a very easy way around this. Instead of using their trade mark say:
"The entire source of this distribution was downloaded from ftp.redhat.com"
or some variation thereof.
Redhat gets to avoid the market confusion as detailed in a previous post and rip-off artists can no longer use the Redhat name to make coin of a distro they put nothing into.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
Mandrakesoft is already moving away from simply
using Redhat's code base. I know RedHat is between a rock and a hard place as far as protecting their business, now that they are one, but that doesn't give them the right to disregard the GPL. A BIG reason that they've done so well is that their dist HAS been redistributed by smaller vendors and individuals again and again.. so this IS biting the hand that feeds you, in a sense. I bought my first copy of Redhat as a boxed MacMillan distribution, and I knew by simply reading the box and manual that "The Complete Red Hat Linux" pkg wasn't the same as "The Official Red Hat Linux" pkg. Duh.
My only question is what recourse is there if the GPL is violated...?
...
....
BFD, that's why we have 40+ distributions.
If RedHat atarts singing a different tune I'll get Debian GNU/Linux and sell my own derivative of that.
Frankly, I expect them to tighten down some, but still stay on the good side of users of Linux, not Linux users and not the so-called Linux community.
It's not like we're a bunch of zombies.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Next they're going to change the name of rpm to lpm, and release red hat only code....
Moondog
http://eparka.com - the interactive outdoor guide
-- Moondog
Why would RedHat lawyers have Amazon yank your site? You think they would contact you *directly*. Why is Walnut Creek still have the "non-box" Red Hat on their site? Same goes for Cheapbytes.
Who cares what Amazon says, what did Red Hat legal say? You *did* contact them over this, right?
Or did you go straight to trying to spin this out of proportion?
Nice Idea - lets see if Mandrake want to take that one on!
If RedHat start playing the corporate game they could do very well commercially, but they will be shunned in here - or are they positioning themselves for a take over by Microsoft??????
"Official Red Hat" is what they don't let you use, along with the shadowman logo.
Their name (i.e., their reputation) is their
only asset. Unless they want to verify that
every clone CD is a byte-for-byte copy of their
official CD, the only way for RH to protect
their reputation from others' carelessness is to
insist that only Red Hat, Inc., can use the
name "Red Hat"... which is the whole point
of trademark law, after all.
http://www.red-bean.com/kfogel
He just said Debian gives away the CD masters totally free of charge and royalty. They're just trying to avoid confusing the general public and ensuring quality control by keeping people from labelling 2nd-hand copies as "official" copies.
What does any of this remotely have to do with free vs non-free software?
So you're saying you ARE redistributing MetroX on your CD's?
You know, not everything in the Official RedHat box set is GPL'd software...
Dang. I was actually looking forward to:
(a) Red Hat being able to distinguish their product from marketplace lookalikes (i.e. the MacMillan boxed set and the like, and
(b) free distro's called "Blue Hat" (from IBM, of course), "Gnu Hat" (from Linux Central or Linux Mall), "Old Hat" (archives), etc., etc. Humor is an excellent marketing tool.
I think not...(*poof*)
So why the "Linux Powered" logo on your NT-hosted web site? Hypocrite.
I didn't see prices or support info on your site - the pages were gone (404). Since you have the details.. are you Robb? Just curious. If your support is good, then yeah - it's a deal.
Now, if MacMillan (or whoever) sells a box that says "Red Hat", a lot of people will be fooled. They'll call Red Hat and get (gasp) turned down because it's not really Red Hat(tm) Linux. That will make them mad, they'll think "Red Hat has bad service!"
"Red Hat" *is* their trademark, and I guess they have the right to control it. I understand their concern over consumer confusion (assuming that's what it's all about.) People will still be able to sell copies of their distro, but they can't say that it's Red Hat because "Red Hat" means more than a CD - it's the infrastructure they're trying to build that supports the distro.
When it boils down to it, no one really has the right to call their distro "Red Hat" except for Red Hat. I'm interested to see what happens to distros that say "based on Red Hat...."
Hey, great plan. That way Alan Cox will have to go look for another job and quit hacking the kernel full time. :/
To Duncan: I agree with you. I do like when the original story is not later edited without any indication that it was edited. I think the Update additions are best and necessary.
Since I standing on my soap box, I would like to add the following comment. The one thing great about /. is that breaking news is sometimes posted without the requisite follow-up research that other news sources usually conduct. As we are all aware of, many times the initial story and /. posting contains misleading information. Eventually, however, the various responses and comments lead to the "true" story. Remember the 1st principle of OSS; many ppl looking at the code is better than a close source of information. The reason why /. works is because many ppl looking at a story eventually leads to the better version of the truth.
Except when it comes to anything to do with Apple.:-)
It was really good to see that a little background work was done before the posting of this story. After all, this is probably going to turn out to be a very unpopular move, and RedHat already bears the burden of being the "Microsoft of Linux." Not that I think that they deserve such a title, but it has been said.
All in all, though, this is a perfectly understandable move. Robert Young has frequently compared selling Linux to selling ketchup -- the differentiation comes with the brand name. Now that RedHat is becoming successful, that brand name is the biggest asset they've got. It is natural to protect it.
Probably some people will blow their top about this, but I really don't think that it is a big deal. My guess is that their distro will continue to be downloadable, albeit without the name, and that RedHat(c) compatible distros will become all the rage.
Any votes on names? I like different types of hats (Red Derby, Top Hat, etc).
As of this posting, the Red Hat trademark story is still at LWN, and it says nothing about "Official" -- it refers only to the term "Red Hat."
Just in case there's anyone else out there who may have forgotten what a scroll bar is for, I'll quote from the LWN story (yes, I chopped some out -- I'm quoting, not copying, okay?):
One possible outcome may be that RH will realize that it needs the services of an attorney who can do a little better than to issue a "verbal warning" and then leave on vacation. If indeed he did so, as we know nothing about this other than what Amazon has claimed. Or it may turn out that somebody at Amazon hit the panic button. Or it may turn out that RH is indeed tightening up on unauthorized use of its trademark.
Until we have it in writing from RH, it's nothing but a game of corporate Humour Rumour.
Now un-knot yer undies and get some sleep.
--Z.
Zontar The Mindless,
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Yah, so all of those linux coder types who they highered just so they can work on linux full time will have to go find other jobs and only work on linux in their free time. I'm sure that will be good for linux in general. And for the trademark: who cares? It's their trademark, it's their logo, they own it. If you wanna sell something redhat put money into and give them nothing in return, fine, but call it "Dirty Linux" or something along those lines, that's 100% legal.
-matt
You're talking about the http://www.bestlinux.tf/ site? Yeah, it's... interesting.
.tf is? And why he's hosting his site there?
Hmmm... I wonder where
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Oops. Sorry about that last sentence. I know I'm tired, but I didn't know it was that bad. It looks like I was multiprocessing and had a thread jump tracks (to add mixed metaphor to my other crimes).
Oh, well, it's a good sign of mumblemumble. Figure it out for yourself, or maybe I'll get back to you tomorrow.
Meanwhile, I'll try to divert attention from my own shortcomings by calling attention to Rob's hilariously tautological disclaimer, which is actually semi-relevant to this thread: All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Keep in mind that it was Amazon that told him not to use the trademark, not Red Hat. Note specifically the following statement:
Of course the legal counsel rep, and only person in the entire Red Hat organization who can respond, David Shumannfang, is currently on vacation and won't be available for a week (9-7-99). Basically we are all screwed and no one at Red Hat knows anything until his return, just lovely.
Looks like someone at Amazon was covering their own butt, and this dude overreacted and started blaming anyone and everyone within arms reach.
I think we need to not pull out the flamethrowers just yet.
--
Pretend there is some witty statement here.
In a forum like /. I agree with an earlier poster who urged that developments be added as UPDATES to the initial report (as you sometimes do), so that early comments remain in context. Of course you run a greater risk of the initial report making you look silly, but most of us are grownups here and ought to understand how these things can happen.
I also applaud /. for checking these things out yourselves before running them, as with the 911-on-Linux story the other day. A true "news" site needs to do basic bullshit-detection to retain credibility. The nearly instantaneous feedback on /. adds an entirely new dimension but the better comments serve a journalistic purpose too -- to find the truth. (I don't mean to sound religious about this, and I'm not saying journalism is perfect, but at least in theory that's what it's supposed to be about.)
Now that /. is owned by a company with actual money, any thought to hiring "real" journalists, who know how to do quick detective work?
Freedom's just another word for nothing left Zulus
Ok, that's very nice but it only confirms that Amazon is asking people not to use someone else's trademark. You might infer that RedHat is behind this somehow and you might be right, but this doesn't prove that. Even if RedHat had dropped a dime to Amazon about this (I kinda doubt it) they probably did it for the right reasons.
This doesn't look heavy handed or draconian to me. I don't see any threat of legal action. I see a request. Seems reasonable to me.
Amazon doesn't want to have to run on the bad side of either RedHat or its customers that might buy an un-official RedHat Linux CD without understanding what that means. What harm comes to a seller of these discs that has to sell them as 'Linux' vs 'RedHat Linux'?
linux.com has pulled that story.
"Red Hat has informed
LWN that the
information was not
correct, and that Mr.
Sands has not talked to
their legal department."
It's close enough you know what you're talking about and far enough away to convey that there may be divergence, the buyer should beware, and that it's the sellers, not Red Hat's, fault if there's something wrong.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
What if we call it the symbol '$' ? Or The Linux distribution formerly known as RedHat..
If you voted for Nader, THIS IS ALL YOUR FAULT!!
http://lwn.net/daily/sands.html
Look at the note at the top of the form...
According to linux.com, Redhat has repudiated this story.
Sigh.
-- Slashdot sucks.
They don't want to alienate us too much- it could cost them everything . And, as it was put earlier, what in the hell do they propose that we call the distribution, pray tell?
This is not looking good folks. Guess we're going to find out how much Red Hat's going to push things- and how hard we're going to push back...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
OK, I've seen the bogosity reports, but I thought I'd chip in anyway.
Red Hat (and Linus) must protect their trademarks to some extent. IANAL, but I understand that failure to protect a trademark can result in losing it. It's a shame that Disney has to go around suing daycare centers about the use of a certain mouse's name, but that's just the way it works under some countries' legal systems.
As for the hoax, that (along with the nasty business about the kernel list a couple of weeks back) just goes to show that Linux (TM) really is making inroads into areas that someone else thought they already had a claim on, and is therefore provoking an immune response. It's a rude nuisance, and I'm not aware that even the most undisciplined Linux advocate has been pulling stunts of such low calibre, but in the big picture it's a good sign that want to see quality software everywhere.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Legally, this is not copyright law; this is trademark law. The GPL doesn't cover this. Red Hat owns the Red Hat name, and it is worth millions of dollars to them. This restriction doesn't effect the software, unless they require that you remove all Red Hat notifications before you ship it (in which case, they are breaking the GPL).
Morally, it makes a lot of sense. If I start my own Red Hat derivative distro (say, mirror their FTP site or pretty much copy the CDs), I have every right to copy and redistribute the software (due to GPL), but no right to any of Red Hat's marketing power. If I say that I have El Cheapo Red Hat disks, I am skimming off of Red Hat's marketing investments, while eating some of their business. That just ain't fittin'.
Worse, what if I derive my own distro from Red Hat? Again, I have every right to do so and to distribute it, but no right to call it Red Hat. After all, I could have easily broken the kernel or whatever with my "improvements". The last thing Red Hat needs are my bugs being attached to their name and destroying their credibility.
That being said, it would make sense to say that a distro was derived from Red Hat n.m. But if Red Hat isn't shipping it, it's not Red Hat. It's Linux.
BTW, isn't this the same board that complains that people equate the names "Red Hat" and "Linux"? Reigning in the Red Hat name makes it harder to forget that there are other distros out there. Accuse Red Hat of one evil or the other, but not both: even a pendulum can't swing both ways at the same time.
--The basis of all love is respect
Personally I like the idea. My girl friend bought me Red Hat 6.0 as a gift, but it turned out to be one of those over priced nock off versions..
I was even confused looking at the package and ended up returning it to the store for the "Official" version.
(Yes I know they are the same, but it's kind of nice to support the company...)
I just hope they don't try to ban someone saying "Based on Red Hat Linux..."
If this is the case, then the name of the distribution is no longer "Red Hat." Theoretically, this would mean that Red Hat should start calling its own official boxed set the "Official Red Hat version of the Blah GNU/Linux system," while all others would be merely the Blah GNU/Linux system. As it stands now, they've given everybody the impression that "Red Hat" is the name of the GPL'd, freely redistributable distribution, not the name of their particular boxing of it.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
RedHat is doing the right thing. They've got to protect a number of things: 1) Their trademark, 2) their reputation, 3) stockholder value and 4) their customers. The trademark is a pretty obvious thing, you can't go and start your own distribution and call it RedHat no more than Microsoft can suddenly decide to change the name of their operating system to Linux.
In this case I'm assuming that somebody burned a RedHat 6.X tree. If this is the case from a trademark standpoint they still can't call it the RedHat distribution or at least they've got to be careful that it can't be misconstrued that its the "Official RedHat 6.0" because its not.
RedHat also provides additional services beyond just the actual Linux installation, namely some level of support. The customer needs to know that what they're buying is the real deal and is supported and so on.
These cheap distributions provide a service to customers as long as the customer actually knows what they're getting. I bought a stack of distributions from Cheap*Bytes and I knew I was just getting a dump of a distribution and not the actual distribution.
I'm not saying RedHat is selflessly thinking of only the customers interests. If they don't do this then customers will get upset which isn't good for the companies finances.
I can tell you exaclty why they are doing this:
Confusion in the marketplace.
People go out and they buy this product called RedHat Linux so the expect support from RedHat. Unfortuately, most of these people are not buying Official RedHat Linux that comes with support. When they find out that they can't get support, it goes something like this:
Cust: I bought RedHat Linux, your product, why don't you support me!?
RH: You didn't buy our official product, you bought the free version.
Cust: But I paid $10 for it... it wasn't free.
RH: Yes, but that money was not for purchasing an Official RedHat license.
At this point the customer either becomes irate and vows never to run Linux (especially RedHat) again or they figure it out. Keep in mind that most people are idiots and cannot figure this out.
Then Red Hat _might_ make a move to make people qualify thier products as "unoffical Red Hat" which is clearly distinguishing them from the rest of Linux.
Now, after Red Hat makes an effort to make it clear to even clueless newbies that they are mearly _one_ of the distributions of Linux, and that "Offical Red Hat" is diffrent from "Unoffical Red Hat," people are whining again.
I'm starting to think the SlashDot/Linux community just won't be happy with _anything_ Red Hat does now.
This is a great move for them, and for Debian, and for Slackware. They are doing thier best to make it clear that they are a _distribution_ of linux, and that doesn't meant that Linux = Red Hat. They are makeing it clear that "we will allow you to copy and redistribute, to a point, but don't do something that will make users expect to get tech support from us if they buy a copied version from you."
Seems like some of you are reacting to this like you expect Red Hat to provide phone support to every user in the Universe. Worse yet, some are actually starting to say that they shouldn't have the right to regulate the use of thier name. If you say Red Hat can't regulate the use of thier product name, how would you like it if they turned the tables on you, and said the same about the use of the word "Linux" itself, and said "Red Hat _IS_ Linux" ... you wouldn't have a leg to stand on if you told them how they can and can't use thier own name.
Lighten up, this is an issue of a series of schmucks selling $2 CD's in online auctions trying to get $70+ (More than the price of the offical version), and leaving clueless bidders believeing they will get support (which they won't). Red Hat is not only protecting itself, they are protecting Linux by keeping people from getting angry and disappointed during thier first experiance with Linux.
This policy originated after too many manufacturers made non-bootable or otherwise messed up versions of Debian. By allowing them to say they were distributing the official CD, we gave them an incentive to use the one we mastered, which had more quality control behind it.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Look at the situation - we have:
A company which has made great alliances with hardware companies, opening up specs to Linux developers early on. (Remember how Linux beat MS on the Merced?)
A company which *PAYS* some of the best hackers in the world to make Linux better.
A company which seems to fully support the LSB.
A company which releases every bit of code under the GPL.
A company that lets their software proliferate around the world, for free.
Their name is Red Hat. And the only thing that seems to be different from yesterday is that people who aren't Red Hat can't call their product Red Hat. How is this going to affect Linux in any tangible way?
When I bought a boxed copy of the distribution last year, I got fooled by MacMillan's repackaging and bought that instead of the official RH boxed set. Some people might buy a computer with "Red Hat Linux pre-installed" and not realize they're not getting the same support as someone who buys a boxed copy. As long as Red Hat still allows CheapBytes, MacMillan, et al to say they're "copies of" RH (or some other such language), I don't see a problem with them cracking down a little.
Just look at his site. He's obviously trying to take advantage of folks that don't know Red Hat this from Red Hat that. To the point of *auctioning* off the CDs that cost him, what, 85 cents for media? And cloaking his product self-righteously in "RedHat GPL" ticks me off, too. What he's doing has very very little to do with the GPL, and quite a lot to do with "profiteering".
[