On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 13:17 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > However we could spin it a lot better. "Fedora does not propose > proprietary software it can't provide user support for" or "Fedora > protects its users from lawsuits" sounds a lots better than "Red Hat > does not want to be sued" or "Fedora objects to IP-encumbered software > on principle" (even if all are true) There are a thousand ways to phrase it. But some considerations ... 1. The term "proprietary"** is not always a "bad word," so it's good to avoid using it in a way that throws that context. **SIDE NOTE: As I've long argued from many different standpoints, the majority of Microsoft software is _not_ even proprietary, but Hostageware/Abandonware. Proprietary means the company actually gives it genuine value and ensures its perpetual support. 2. The phrase "IP-encumbered" caters far better to corporations and legal folk, and tells them "we've taken all your concerns -- patents and other indemnification aspects -- into account." 3. The concept of "principle" can be a very positive aspect, and sends the message that "with Fedora, you will be guaranteed X, Y and Z." Just my $0.02, from a hardcore, American Libertarian and Capitalist and long-time Red Hat product consultant at various organizations in North America. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------------- Fission Power: An Inconvenient Solution -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
