On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 07:46 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Anything thats different from "Red Hat" can be used to enforce a > different set of trademark guidelines . So thats "Fedora" for you. Its > a different name. Different principles "Red Hat" and "Fedora" are different. Why can't an illustration of a hat be different then? > A hat especially a Fedora is already owned by Shadow man. Why not a different hat? I don't understand this. IANAL, but from a legal perspective, just the word "Fedora(TM)" is infringing on the fact that Shadow man wears a Red Fedora! Again, explain this to me like I'm a 2-year old. In other words, if Red Hat already considers anything with a "hat" in its trademark to be a potential infringement it must enforce, then the mere name of "Fedora" is one damn big problem! But if Red Hat says it owns the Fedora trademark and has guidelines on its usage, then why can't it do the same with an illustration as much as a word? Especially a word that is ... "Fedora"?! Again, explain this to me like I'm a 2-year old. Heck, explain this to me like I'm a judge. > Shadow man wont let you touch him. He hates Fedora. ;-) Huh? I disagree. Shadow man is Red Hat, and Red Hat has been largely Fedora. -- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx http://thebs413.blogspot.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The best things in life are NOT free - which is why life is easiest if you save all the bills until you can share them with the perfect woman -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
