Am Mo, den 14.03.2005 schrieb Johnny Hughes um 11:31:
> No ... the problem that Red Hat? complained about (and that I disagree
> with) was trademark related and did not have anything to do with
> filenames or software content.
>
> It was related only to the CentOS.org website using terms in describing
> our product, in our meta tags, and in linking directly to the RedHat.com
> website.
>
> We are now (and have always been) in full compliance with the Red Hat?,
> Inc's trademark guidelines with respect to the distribution of software
> that is built from sources that they provide.
>
> http://www.redhat.com/about/corporate/trademark/guidelines/page6.html
>
> Thanks,
> Johnny Hughes
Thank you for the answer and the enlightenment. I was - obviously not
correct - thinking that Red Hat? cares about the usage of the term
"RHEL" in any case.
Alexander
--
Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG http://pgp.mit.edu 0xB366A773
legal statement: http://www.uni-x.org/legal.html
Fedora Core 2 GNU/Linux on Athlon with kernel 2.6.10-1.770_FC2smp
Serendipity 01:36:49 up 2 days, 4:10, load average: 0.17, 0.16, 0.17
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050315/27f004e2/attachment.bin
