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

Re: Hats!

Hash: SHA1

Karsten Wade escribió:
> I guess I'm a bit confused about the "not wearing a red fedora" rule for
> Ambassadors.  That is something that is hard to make a rule.  For
> example, I attend Bay Area Linux events as an Ambassador and as a Red
> Hat associate.  If I wear my red fedora at the Fedora booth at LWCE, I
> dare anyone to tell me I cannot wear it.  But I probably _won't_ wear
> it, because it confuses people.  I'm not there as a representative of
> Red Hat, but as a Fedora community member.  For me, this is a VERY BIG
> DIFFERENCE, and I think the same is true for all people who work for Red
> Hat and are a part of Fedora.[1]
> The core of all this is the way trademark laws work.  Red Hat has the
> "Shadowman" logo trademarked, which is a human face in the shadow of a
> fedora he is wearing.  It is obvious that, if Fedora were to use a hat
> in any form as part of its logo, it would confuse people as to what was
> Red Hat and what Fedora.  Ironically, because of trademark laws, Red Hat
> would likely have to enforcing its trademark against Fedora.  *ick*
> This is because, to keep a trademark current, one has to defend it
> against _all_ abuses, intentional or not.
> Now, an Ambassador wearing a red fedora at a Fedora booth doesn't seem
> much like "trademark infringement."  But it could be confusing to
> people.  So, maybe instead of it being a confusing rule, it could be a
> guideline -- "Ambassadors, please don't wear a red fedora or Red Hat
> gear at Fedora events, it confuses people."  Is that good enough?
> - Karsten
> [1] To expand on that a bit ... Red Hat (RHT) is a public company with
> very strict rules (in the US in particular) about what can and cannot be
> discussed publicly.  Fedora is the opposite of that -- there is almost
> nothing that cannot or should not be discussed in public.
> So, if I were at a Fedora booth, wearing all Red Hat gear, and talking
> about what is coming on the Fedora technology roadmap, I'm sure that is
> going to create confusion for someone.  What if a financial analyst
> comes by, decides I'm giving insider information, and acts upon it?  A
> series of coincidences could lead to me being arrested for violating
> insider trading laws, as well as out on the street without a job.
> IANAL, but as a layperson who has been trained on what I can and cannot
> do under US Federal laws, I have a pretty clear idea of what is risky
> behavior.  So, I wear 100% Fedora gear at Fedora booths, and when people
> ask if I work for Red Hat, I say, "Yes, but that has nothing to do with
> why I'm here," etc.  In fact, until _very_recently_, my Red Hat job was
> unrelated to my volunteer Fedora work.  But because of my position in
> the company and the project, it would be easy to get confused about when
> I was speaking for one or the other group.  Wearing one set of "colors"
> helps take care of that.

If anything about Fedora I do not agree with (keep in mind I'm a
die-hard-supporter and fan of the distribution) is precisely the name.
Not because of anything else, but because Red Hat *deliberately*
depleted the word of meaning... So others wouldn't be "confused", but
that actually turned out to be even more confusing. At first (not
being an English speaker myself) I was a bit confused when these
issues were first discussed, as I simply ignored what "Fedora" meant,
then I realized that it is not only a kind of hat, but *the* kind of
hat Red Hat uses in its logo... At first it made sense, but then it
stopped when for all intents and purposes the word simply stopped
meaning that within the Fedora and Red Hat context. I know it is
intended as a pun and whether we like it or not (for English speakers
at least) the word "fedora" still means a kind of hat, and hence will
associate it with Red Hat (it doesn't take a rocket scientists to put
it together Linux + fedora (a hat) = similar to Red Hat Linux), and
even new users have heard of Red Hat at some point, more so being it
the highest profile commercial Linux distributor.

By the time I was aware of this situation (FC2) I was confused why did
Red Hat let it go, I mean, they want to prevent brand confusion and
association, yet, the name for their (at the time) community project,
was the name of a kind of hat (which made sense back then), but then
when the association bond was meant to be broken, I still say that
necessarily a change of name should have been needed, to fully prevent
any case of "mistaken identity". I know these all situations presented
as the project matured, but in the fist place this was (IMO) what
caused the project to "seek a new identity" through the means of the
"logo", and sublimation of what did we (as the community) wanted
Fedora to be, and based on that create its "corporative image" (AKA
logo), but despite the name (which by this point it was merely a
"word" without meaning), it cannot be associated to Red Hat in any way
(effectively depleting of any meaning the word). I may be too pedantic
about a simple freaking "word"... Just imagine what would it happened
if Microsoft suddenly simply said that the word "word" has to be
depleted of any meaning as it happens to be the name of one of its
flagship products? Ok, that was a bit of an exaggeration, but by no
means too far stretched out... I'm not *complaining* as such, and I
*love* and support and live by Fedora any time, any place... This
situation simply kinda bothered me, and it was until very recently
that I became aware and could actually *express* what I thought about
the whole deal, so that's why I kept my mouth shut when it was the
time to "discuss it"... I just felt like taking the opportunity to
vent out (if anyone cares at all). I don't mean to bash in any way
this wonderful distribution... In the end, the name is just a "word",

Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


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