output redistribution issues again, was Re: [Fedora-livecd-list] Kadischi: roadmap from Board meeting ?

[Jane Dogalt]

--- Jane Dogalt <jdogalt at yahoo.com> wrote:

> --- Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> 
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Kadischi/Legal
> 
> I hate to be obtuse here Chitlesh, but seeing as how finally someone (Chris)
> clearly has _precisely_ the same question as I do, I need to reiterate that
> your supplied legal link does not answer my question.

Ok.  I _think_ that reading the bottom most section of the wiki page, that the
answer to my question is clearly "Yes, no problem".

And especially now that I read the link to the redhat/fedora trademark
guidelines, which I believe has changed signifgantly in the past 2 years, I
think the answer is really "absolutely, no problem".

My confusion, and I'm hoping to clear up other people's confusion here as well,
stemmed from what I believe was a historical guideline which forbid the
_inclusion_ of fedora/rh copyrighed artwork and trademarks in a derivative
distribution.  In which case, merely having the fedora-logos.rpm files would
make something unredistributable.  Perhaps this was never the case.  Certainly
judging by the succinctness of the current trademark guidelines, and the
following quote, it appears that my #2 case, and Question: below, are
absolutely not a problem-

"Red Hat does not permit or consent to any use of its trademarks in any manner
that is likely to cause confusion by implying association with or sponsorship
by Red Hat."

Although the more specific question is-  If people see a fedora logo on a gdm
login screen on an iso called jane_dogalt_is_the_coolest.iso, would that "be
likely to cause confusion by implying association with or sponsorship by Red
Hat"?

For my own purposes, I still think it will be wise for my own project to have a
post install script which removes the fedora-logos.rpm package, so that users
of my output needn't worry about splitting that legal hair.

-jdog



> 
> I think in the archive post I referenced, the situation of #2, is very
> simple,
> and I can't seem to get a straight answer from fedora.  Can you please
> specifically answer my question in the above Kadischi Legal Wiki, i.e.
> 
> Question:  If I as fedora/kadischi user, produce a livecd with kadischi (say
> nothing more than the supplied minimal.ks and a post install script that adds
> a
> motd of "jane dogalt is the coolest"), am I legally allowed to post that on
> my
> own website for mass distribution under the title
> "jane_dogalt_is_the_coolest.iso"?
> 
> I.e. due to the default behavior of kadischi, fedora-logos*.rpm will be
> installed.  Is that a problem?  If so would simply removing that rpm in a
> post
> install script resolve the distribution problem?
> 
> I don't think I can specify the question any clearer than that.  And I for
> the
> life of me don't see an answer to that in the wiki-kadischi-legal you
> referenced.
> 
> -jdog
> 
> > 
> > On 4/17/06, Chris Negus <cnegus at rucls.net> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 23:29 -0500, Jasper O'neal Hartline wrote:
> > > > Jane Dogalt wrote:
> > > > Now this is really strange, Kadischi is a tool to yes, to create LiveCD
> > > > media..
> > > > but to create Fedora Core CD media. Although Rahul mentions running
> > > > Anaconda in Debian
> > > > may be possible, I don't think right now is the time to be focusing any
> > > > efforts on running Kadischi
> > > > on everything but Fedora Core. Likewise in this same respect, Kadischi
> > > > shouldn't be focusing
> > > > on allowing users to build thier own "distribution". It is a LiveCD
> tool
> > > > not a distribution tool.
> > >
> > > Actually, I think this is a good point. The Fedora project still hasn't,
> > > in my mind, clearly stated how to legally use its logos and trademarks.
> > > The Wiki says to make formal requests to use the logo. I've made two
> > > such requests and have not gotten a response back.
> > >
> > > So the question is not whether or not we want to help people build their
> > > own distributions from Kadischi. The question is how can someone legally
> > > redistribute "anything" built with Kadischi? If you change the splash
> > > screen or rebuild a package from source, is the resulting CD still
> > > Fedora? If not, do we legally have to remove references to Fedora?
> > >
> > > -- Chris Negus
> > >
> > > --
> > > Fedora-livecd-list mailing list
> > > Fedora-livecd-list at redhat.com
> > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-livecd-list
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > http://clunixchit.blogspot.com
> > 
> > --
> > Fedora-livecd-list mailing list
> > Fedora-livecd-list at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-livecd-list
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com