On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 12:01 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/05/2010 12:37 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 11:08 -0400, Brandon Lozza wrote: >> >>> That's what i've been saying all day. It's only free software if you >>> change the name, in which case you may loose brand recognition. >>> Imagine if Linus forbid people from calling their OS Linux if they >>> didn't use the binaries provided by him. >> >> that's the entire point of having trademarks. Free software projects are >> obliged to allow you to access and modify their code. They are not >> obliged to allow you to benefit from their reputation. > > Close source school of thinking - Trademarks exist to protect an > enterprise's product and to close out "copyiers". FLOSS exists to enable > people "to share". > >> It doesn't make >> any sense to say 'I think this product needs to be modified but I wish >> to be able to represent my modified product as being the same thing as >> the original product in order to benefit from the reputation attached to >> the original product'. > > The overwhelming majority of FLOSS project think differently. They are > proud of others picking up their works and to redistribute it. > > Or differently: GCC, KDE, QT, GNOME etc. all benefit from them not > applying trademark restrictions, but from being used (in modified > versions) on dozens of OSes, distributions etc. > > That said, Fedora's leadership is proud of having pushed Fedora into > isolation. > > Ralf > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Richard Stallman got back to me "I think this is a problem, and FSF people are now studying the extent of similar restrictions." -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
