On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 02:28:09AM +0800, John wrote: > Unless I misunderstood something, if I acknowledge Red Hat's copyright > claim, I'm misusing Red Hat's trademark. That is not correct. You have to remove any use of Red Hat's trademarks from any product that you are selling for commercial gain. Red Hat's corporate name in copyright statements is different. Cheers, Matt > However, I am _not_ a lawyer, and I _am_ easily confused. I'd really hat > to have to explain to Professor Fels (who heads the body that enforces > our Trade Practices Act) these CDs, which are perfect copies of Red Hat > Linux, do _not_ contain Red Hat Linux. How can I argue that the contents > of the CDs are different from one Red Hat sells? Or that the same CDs on > offer at PLUG do contain Red Hat Linux, when I myself don't see the > difference? Red Hat Linux, as a product, is more than the CDs that you have burned. Representing only the CDs on a web-site for sell (or eBay, or other corporate endeavor) as "Red Hat Linux" is false. Only the software combined with the other goods and services that go into our product can be called "Red Hat Linux", and the use of that mark to advertise or endorse a product requires a trademark license from the trademark holder (that is, Red Hat, Inc.) This is an important distinction that confuses a lot of people. Hope this helps. Cheers, Matt
