Marcus Moeller wrote:
> Good Evening.
>
> ...
>> Courtesy and to have something within the centos space to point to.
>> Plus: Finding the manuals on upstream *all in one place* (like
>> clustermanagement, virtualization and so on) isn't that easy.
>
> I personally welcome that the docs are mirrored on CentOS.org. Maybe
> we could spend some more time to de-brand them completly.
>
I don't think that's possible looking at the notice at the bottom of the
documentation:
/---
Note: This documentation is provided {and copyrighted} by Red Hat?, Inc.
and is released via the Open Publication License. The copyright holder
has added the further requirement that Distribution of substantively
modified versions of this document is prohibited without the explicit
permission of the copyright holder. The CentOS project redistributes
these original works (in their unmodified form) as a reference for
CentOS-5 because CentOS-5 is built from publicly available, open source
SRPMS. The documentation is unmodified to be compliant with upstream
distribution policy. Neither CentOS-5 nor the CentOS Project are in any
way affiliated with or sponsored by Red Hat?, Inc.
---/
>>> One more thing - I'm wondering about the continued use of the "prominent
>>> North American Enterprise Linux vendor" phrase that appears on the
>>> website. Presumably this dates back to a time when Red Hat was less
>>> receptive to CentOS but that has changed now? Is this something that
>>> could/should be dropped now relations are friendlier?
>
> You may want to take a look at the Trademark Guidelines, Ch.A. Use of
> the Brand ...
>
> "The only way to obtain permissions to use the RH's trademark is by
> entering into a written license agreement with RH Inc. ... Absolutely
> no exeptions."
>
> But maybe we could just ask for it.
>
I don't think it's about using RH's trademark, but simply referring to
them by name (who they are) rather than by some cryptic phrase for fear
of infringing on their trademark. I'm sure this has some history that
dates back to a time when Red Hat were less enthusiastic about community
rebuilds of their product than they are now. My point was simply that if
times have moved on then maybe it's time the language used to describe
the upstream vendor should move on too?
For example, take a look at the text used on the CentOS home page:
http://www.centos.org/
/---
*CentOS Overview*
CentOS is an Enterprise-class Linux Distribution derived from sources
freely provided to the public by a prominent North American Enterprise
Linux vendor.
---/
The homepage and About page are littered with references to "a prominent
North American Enterprise Linux vendor" and "upstream", whilst also
containing many links to Red Hat's servers, yet fail to directly mention
Red Hat anywhere by name. I was under the impression that the
relationship was somewhat warmer than that now??
