[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: OT: Media format patents and commercial installations



On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 10:04 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 5/26/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram fedoraproject org> wrote:
> > Nothing stops you from modifying Fedora and including non-free software
> > for OEM systems. Trademark guidelines do not allow this system to be
> > called Fedora anymore though.  There has been discussions in fedora-
> > marketing list about this
> 
> The way I read
> http://fedora.redhat.com/About/legal/trademarks/guidelines/page5.html
> 
> An OEM can market a system as Fedora + value addon under certain conditions.
> 
> <quote>
> The original Fedora™ code is intact and identifiable at the time of
> installation and on the media on which the code is delivered;
> 
> a)
> The patches are provided independent of the original Fedora™ code and
> are identifiable on the media on which the code is delivered;
> </quote>
> 
> I read this to mean that when an OEM system is delivered/marketed what
> comes in Fedora  and what the OEM is providing as a value addon are
> clearly delineated. So in the case of media, the OEM addons are on
> seperate media than the Fedora software.
> In the case of a pre-installed system, there must be a breakdown as to
> what is provided as a value add-on before the system is purchased, and
> it must be clear in the packaging that certain packages are OEM
> provided and not Fedora.
> 
> <quote>
> b)
> The end user is given the discretion as to whether to install the patches; and
> </quote>
> 
> I read this to mean that the OEM must provide a means by which to
> opt-out of any value-added software pre-install, so that the purchaser
> can choose a stock Fedora operating system install.  I would go
> further and say this should be demanded as a no-cost option to the
> purchaser.
> 
> <quote>
> c) Any marketing materials related to such a distribution make clear
> that the vendor is providing patches which, if installed by the user,
> will modify the Fedora™ code from its original form
> </quote>
> 
> This clarifies my interpretation of a). Pre-install OEM services are
> "okay" as long as the OEM makes it clear, before purchase, with
> specificity, as to what is being installed that either replaces Fedora
> components or adds new components.
> 
> 
> Is my interpretation of these conditions wrong?

Seems to be right. The requirement is a clear segregation of what is
part of Fedora and what is not.

Rahul


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]