Trademarks
Greg DeKoenigsberg
gdk at redhat.com
Sun Jul 3 21:54:23 UTC 2005
I would expect that our legal folks will expect that other trademarks be
honored, just as we would expect our own trademarks to be honored.
My $0.02: do your best to "do the right thing." Worst case scenario,
someone yells at us and says, "hey, that's trademarked!" and we fix it.
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Sat, 2 Jul 2005, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-07-02 at 14:22 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > Should one acknowledge trademarks somehow in all package summaries and
> > descriptions in Extras? I think yes, but I don't see this mentioned in
> > the Wiki anywhere, and there are many packages that would need to be
> > updated wrt. this.
> >
> > For example, I'm committing an update to the kernel-module-thinkpad in a
> > jiffy, with the following summary and description. Would this be
> > ok/needed in all packages that refer to US/other trademarks, or is it
> > possible to have a "blanket trademark acknowledgement" somewhere? Or
> > something else?
>
> I suspect that what you've done is correct, but it should be run past RH
> legal. Greg, what does legal want us to do with regards to other
> people's trademarks?
>
> ~spot
> --
> Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260
> Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
> Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org
> Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
>
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list