I really appreciate your comments guys, even though I may sound like a
stubborn nonsensical guy at times, I'm trying my best to get this right.
Thus far I've gone through the nVidia and Flash licenses, they allow
redistribution as long as the binary part of the packages is not changed
(in the case of Flash, that's the package in itself and in the case of
nVidia's driver, that's the X aspect of the package, as the kernel-side
portion may require patches to get it built). In any case, both allow
redistribution. I took a look at how other vendors are putting systems
together, in particular HP workstations with some or another flavor of
RHEL installed. We're not planning going with RHEL for a number or
reasons (and thats not necesarily related to support subscriptions, more
on that bellow). What I learned of how HP distributes their Workstations
is by asking their users to log into their website to finish
configuration of the Workstation (most likely to allow for third party
software to be installed and properly acknowledge the users). So that
there could be sort of a solution to our problem (details on this
project and projected scope, etc, in a bit). Many of the extra packages
we want to include are actually part of Fedora Extras, but that got out
of Core (for some obvious and some not so obvious reasons), but which we
consider could be considered as pluses, especially for our targetted
audiences.
The most spikey issue is of course that of Multimedia (as I have
mentioned before), as people currenly expect to be able to have some
sort of multimedia capabilities... Still while not directly providing
the packages, would proper documentation on how to install them, plus
disclaimers that if the user so chooses to install, say a DVD player,
even though the validity of libdvdcss in Linux is doubtious (at the very
least), the Fedora Foundation, the Fedora Project and ourselves (system
builders) cannot be held responsible for the use given to such
applications and tools, are not liable to responsibility from legal
issues of any kind derived from the use there of? Sorry if my question
is a bit confusing, but what I mean is that if we warn the users, even
though providing the info on how to install such applications, but not
directly providing the applications per se, and stating that any
problems derived from the use of such apps, is the sole responsibility
of the user and the user alone, would that still be a violation to the
guidelines of Fedora Foundation and trademark use?
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
Guess, Fedora is best suited for individual use only... As going
through all the restrictions, and balancing what most users expect to
find in their comptuers, it'd deffinitely be hard to market such
computers. Despite the computer's raw power. As I said earlier, what
worries me the most is the hardware part, as I can leave the system to
a default (kickstart) installation, letting users configure their
users, change root's password, etc., but (and I would too) users
expect the hardware they buy a new system with to flawlessly work with
the OS the system shipped. This is what leaves me worried. As these
are the rough specs we thought of the systems:
Like you have mentioned Kickstart has all sort of hooks for OEM to use
so the infrastructure to do more than individual deployments is
certainly there along with GFS, Xen and so on. Jesse Keating did a
presentation on Fedora for OEM distributions in FUDCon1 which you
might want to read
http://fedoraproject.org/fudcon/FUDCon1/
Thanks a lot, Rahul. I'll certainly take a look at it! Certainly
Kickstart would be the way to go, plus taking advantage of the
capability of Anaconda to install extra disks from the first boot
interface. Whether the user decides or not to use the "extras" disk,
would be up to him/her, and as such the Fedora intallation would be
safeguarded that way, because up until that point, the installation will
be a pristine Fedora default.
We've thought of a few ways to walk around this issue, like if
we just leave Fedora be and go for another distro (we wouldn't want to
do that, though) or offer the drivers as a separate disk with
installation instructions, and probably those packages we would have
had added to the system... BUT this could also in itself be an issue
if in anyway there's a restriction to do this as well. I'm going
through the licenses of Flash, RealPlayer and the nVidia (and ATi)
drivers as well... I didn't expect this to be easy...
I cannot offer legal advise but here are some of my personal opinions.
Regardless of any distribution you use, you would have similar
trademark guidelines in place to prevent confusion. As long as you
dont modify Fedora in anyway and simple redistribute it with the
additional packages clearly indicated as such the trademark guidelines
should not affect you. Do a license audit of the add on packages and
if the licenses allow redistribution without a EULA (Interactive
installations is against the design goals of RPM) you can integrate
them within a repository and have a post installation hook to pull in
packages from a OEM repository or design a custom application say in
GTK+ that has a druid or even a simple shell script and zenity (part
of GNOME-utils) with fallbacks. The application would have the EULAs
which the user can agree to before getting the necessary packages
which can be launched on first login for the system
administrator/user. As long as you make it clear that this application
and whatever packages it uses is not part of Fedora this seems to be a
clean solution to me.
Well, just to round up a bit more what I said earlier. When looking at
how HP configures their Workstations, a similar idea could be done here.
Either require the user to visit certain webiste to gather additional
information on how to set up their systems, or tell them up front in the
documentation with a very visible, nice looking, EASY TO FOLLOW(1)
installation guide and first steps with the new system, so that they
understand that up to that point during first boot system setup, the
system is a clean Fedora default installation, and what follows is our
post-configuration to get all the additional programs and device drivers
in place for intended system use (as advertised by us). The tricky part
will be to have good Fedora advertising and still provide some extra
functionality that will (hopefully) make users buy more systems from us.
This blance between our intention to be true to Fedora, and yet have
some value added to systems built by us, will be the REAL challenge.
Especially to avoid striding too much away from a Fedora's default
installation.
Just to clarify: Even changing default theme (to another GPL'ed one)
would cause an issue with the trademark? Even if the theme COMES with
Fedora in a default installation?
All of the Free and open source software licenses allow you to copy,
modify and redistribute software licensed under them. Thats however
orthogonal to the trademark guidelines.
http://www.redhat.com/magazine/007may05/
I'll take a look at that issue of Red Hat Mag. Anyway, I believe that
the easiest way will be to have default settings an leave the users
decide what they want... We like the clearlooks olive theme better...
(though I have to admit I like it a lot too when combined clearlooks
window border with Bluecurve Strawberry or Orange GTK colors)
Legal like security is a field where it pays to be paranoidal. So we
have to assume worst case scenarios. If suppose the trademark
protection guidelines allow the OEM to change the theme and if they
switch the distribution to use one of the al1y GPL'ed theme included
in Fedora as the default, that would be aesthetically non appealing
even while serving the functionality it is designed for, leaving users
of this modified distribution leaving a bad impression on what Fedora
is. So thats potentially a scenario that the guidelines are meant to
avoid. The alternative would be to get special exceptions which is a
hassle.
Yes, and because I know that is taht I'm trying to figure out what would
be the best way to balance user requests with what can be provided with
our systems, and having this wonderful distribution as the core of it all
I would like to hear your plans with more details. How many systems
are you planning to redistribute Fedora?, market segment, timeframe etc.
regards
Rahul
The whole plan for the Fedora based computers is like this:
It all started when one of my best friends asked me to insall Linux on
his PC and he became immediately hooked, switched in a matter of days...
According to what we have gathered thus far, there is a potential market
in Mexico, quite big. Since we are a poor nation, and given the fact
that usually computer hardware down here runs for at least twice as much
as in the US, a cheapper alternative is needed. Not only that, but the
systems sold by some of the big names in the industry can run for
several thousand dollars for a top of the line system, while a mid-range
system can still be quite pricey, we're talking that a Windows Media
Center computer by HP can easily run for as much as $3500 USD. Mid-range
and entry-level PCs while cheapper, usually lack a lot in the hardware
department and even when they may have powerful components like
processors and the like, usually the system is lacking in memory (like a
P4 2.8 GHz with 256 Mb RAM with Windows XP on it) and are usually quite
bloated in the software department (especially start up programs).
So we started to think of ways to get better hardware at lower prices,
and since we both use Linux we thought that it could only be natural to
use Linux. But we've also identified some necessities from the users
with whom we have most contact, like the need for really simple and to
the point applications (we know Linux distros usually have plenty of
those), easy enough to use interface and updates system (who can beat
yum, anyway?!), etc. However, there is an increasing necessity for
multimedia compliance, and here are the spikes. Because during the
second half of the nineties, when multimedia systems bloomed, also
bloomed the mp3 audio format, and very quickly the people started to
compress all their CD libraries into their computers usin mp3... And
when the world learnt that the format was not free and a license was
required, that ruled out many Linux systems. At any rate, a lot of
people has asked us if they'd be able to transfer their existin library
into Linux, hence the need for a media player capable of playing mp3
(and for some, wma, too).
The DVD issue is not as a big deal as the mp3 thing is, becuase a lot of
people simply have a home DVD to watch their movies on, so they don't
actually care about a DVD player, but they DO care about web and
streaming video content... Another problem as the most widely used
formats aren't free either, Microsoft's Windows Media Video and AVIs are
quite common place on websites, not to mention other proprietary formats
like Real Video and QuickTime. Was because of these "needs" that we
decided that maybe including a media player like mplyaer, VLC or Xine
could be a good idea, but when looked from above, it actually doesn't...
Even though simply not providing a means to play this content could be a
nay-say for many users.
Another issue we found that users were constatntly telling us, has got
to do with security, virii and all those exploits of which Windows has
been subject of as of late. Fortunately Linux is inherently safer than
Windows, anyway, the real reason for that is that with all the spyware
that some Windows computers mange to get, the performance of a computer
starts to deteriorate to ridiculous point, so people have actualy asked
us about "durability" of a Linux system, said another way "How much time
until it start crawling instead of running". We believe Linux can help
us there too.
So having this in mind and the fact that especially computer
enthusiastic users have approached us becuase we are asidous Linux
users, made us believe that we could sell what is still considered to be
a higher-end system for quite a reasonable price, with support and a
Free operating system installed.
So initially we'll try to sell the systems to computer savvy users, but
the ultimate goal is to try and address as much as we can the needs of
those "less literate" users. Having the hardware and the software in
place is not all there is to it. Just like Apple did in late nineties,
we believe that Linux should be sold "in style". That's why we set the
hardware standards for our intended systems a bit too high and yet
affordable. The sum of the parts of the hardware for a system like the
one of my last post (and dpending on the graphics card the system has)
can run for as much as $1200 USD (sacrificing in the graphics dept.,
with say a GeForce 6600 plain). Still a very imprssive system, yet quite
affordable, as 1200 bucks is usually what an entry-level (with mid-range
specs) costs. Of course there are systems for as low as 500 dollars, but
they're too tight in hardware. The intention is to make the systems last
(in the hardware dept., at least) for some at least 5 years.
For us profits would be in support and hardware sells... If we get a
critical mass big enough, should be enough for the business to maintain
itself.
However (and I did read about this in the guidelines), we'd have to
figure out an advetisement campaing that not only puts Fedora on the
radar of buyers, but also would not be in contraposition with said
guidelines to not be misleading and stuff... and being this especially
true if promoted as a gaming rig (for instance) with the waves of
comercial games that have announced Linux support and all, as
fundamental hardware support (in this case graphics) is not part of the
distribution. Other market segment we'll try to get into is the small
to medium office desktop, as we've had some possitive feedback in this
regard. Corporate scale is not part of our scope, at least not yet. And
for these systems, while still keeping much of the fancyness of the
hardware, we've agreed not to soup up the graphics hardware, as such
embedded Chrome chips are ideal in this scenario, as they even have
kernel-level DRM drivers nowadays, so even graphics 3D accelartion is
possible (if not as fast and fancy as with the "higher"-end systems we
are planning.
As I said before, multimedia is a quite a big deal, even in an office
environment, where the users may have setup a VoIP prgram, and they'd
still want to be able to listen to their radio stations or music
libraries, that's why we've also payed special attention to audio
hardware, and deal with that which we know will be able to offer
customers that without worrying about if they could dmix Skype or
TeamSpeak while they're listeningto music, playing their games, watching
videos or whatever. Right now we have very narrow options for this
hardware mixing requirement (as I said my previous e-mail), and though
there are more options, we've been unable to find (here) hardware based
on other chips which are known to have good ALSA hardware mixing
support (like Trident's 4D Wave, besides the ones mentioned)
So pretty much these are as many details as we have right now... We are
working our hearts out to research more about this legal mumbo-jumbo. We
plan on developing these plans in the upcoming 6 months. The goal is to
try and see how many systems are we able to get people interested on...
I just hope we could find a balance between "cool" factor and legal
compliance.
So I guess that during the next 6 months our milestone will be set at
approximately 1000 systems (conservative figures, I know).
(1) I've actually seen people render simple things into quite
complicated matters.
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
